U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 07-13-2011, 03:32 PM
 
3,438 posts, read 2,544,811 times
Reputation: 1784

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamBarrow View Post
I wasn't even talking about her anymore as much as I was talking about the last page of strawmen in this thread. I will pull up quotes if you want, but the primary message was that "repugs" think slavery was great. It's ridiculous, not to mention insulting.



They did go about it wrong, I already conceded that. Anyway...

I think it was hyperbole. We've heard very similar remarks in the past from others. They were hyperbole.

You think that she supports slavery.

See what I did there? We have different opinions. I fail to see how yours is absolute gospel whereas mine is idiotic. You get me some hard proof and I'll change my mind. As of now you have nothing.
I never said that she supported slavery. I think I said from the beginning that the statement was not made with good intentions and if they thought they wouldn't get called racist for it, they must've ridden the short yellow bus to school. You mentioned my interpretation in a few of your posts earlier on. The thing is, interpretation is important and when in a position of authority, it is important to consider how people may interpret or misinterpret what you say.

I find it hard to believe that they thought no one would find issue with the statement. Based on the withdrawal and apology, they seemed to see how people would have an issue with it, after the fact. The statement implies that black families were more intact during slavery....not only is it wrong but it makes people sick to think about going back to a time where they were beaten, raped and killed with no rights. Why is that so hard for you to understand? The more you defend, the harder it is for anyone to move past it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-13-2011, 03:56 PM
 
6,156 posts, read 4,136,868 times
Reputation: 1513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Factsplease View Post
I never said that she supported slavery. I think I said from the beginning that the statement was not made with good intentions and if they thought they wouldn't get called racist for it, they must've ridden the short yellow bus to school. You mentioned my interpretation in a few of your posts earlier on. The thing is, interpretation is important and when in a position of authority, it is important to consider how people may interpret or misinterpret what you say.
Did I ever dispute the fact that Bachmann was crazy? You'll find multiple posts by me attesting to that in this thread as well as others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Factsplease View Post
I find it hard to believe that they thought no one would find issue with the statement. Based on the withdrawal and apology, they seemed to see how people would have an issue with it, after the fact. The statement implies that black families were more intact during slavery....not only is it wrong but it makes people sick to think about going back to a time where they were beaten, raped and killed with no rights. Why is that so hard for you to understand? The more you defend, the harder it is for anyone to move past it.
I'll say it again, as I have numerous times before. It was a very bad analogy to use.

That doesn't necessarily make her racist, just stupid. And it sure as hell doesn't make "repugs" slavery condoning racists. You didn't say this, but others did and that's mostly what I was responding to before.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 04:58 PM
 
Location: Midwest City, Oklahoma
8,096 posts, read 4,690,626 times
Reputation: 2877
Who ****ing cares? Most blacks under slavery weren't as mistreated as the historical exaggerations would like you to believe. In fact, Thomas Jefferson remarked many times how the conditions for his slaves at Monticello were better than poor white men of the time.

In the late 1700's, many white people were literally starving to death in the streets. They had to constantly seek work, and there were no guarantees of anything. Much of slavery actually has more parallels with communism than the propaganda you read about.

Slaves were given a job, a place to live, they were fed, and clothed. Not very well, but there would be no reason for a slaveowner to mistreat his slaves, or let them starve. A slave cost about $20,000+ in todays money. Thats like buying a new car. You aren't exactly going to let your slave get sick and die, or get injured, or otherwise harmed to where they become a burden. The primary goal of the abuses under slavery was to both get them to continue working for next to nothing(yes, many slaves were actually paid, some even purchased their freedom), and to keep them from running away. If you know much about the history of communism, especially the collective-farms. You might realize that those people had production quotas they had to meet, or they would receive severe consequences, and if they tried to run away, they would also have severe consequences. One of the punishments that befell some of the people in the Soviet Union was intentional starvation.


I'm not trying to defend slavery, but there really isn't that much of a difference between slavery and serfdom for instance. Under the feudal system there were two classes of society, the nobles and the peasants, in which you could never go from one to the other. The Nobles spoke of peasants like they were complete worthless garbage, and that their bloodlines gave them the right to rule over them.

Sure, there were some things about slavery that was far worse. Like their capture and transport across the Atlantic(though the capture part was done by other Africans). And families being split up and sold. But, slavery was far from being a new idea when it came to America. In fact, during the early 1800's, America was involved in the "Barbary wars", which were north African pirates who would capture European merchants and sell them into slavery in North Africa and the Middle-east, supposedly more than a million Americans and Europeans were captured by the pirates, until North Africa came under French control in the 1830's.


As for Bachmann's quotes, they are actually more spot-on than most people want to admit. During and for a time after slavery, the black community had to be united, because of the constant outside pressures on it. This neccessity for community support held families together very well, just as it held families of other races together as well during that time.

What has destroyed the family, is basically that people don't need each other anymore. Which is why the welfare state has done more to destroy families than anything else, and black families have been the greatest target for welfare than any other group. Also, things like the television set and the internet, distant occupations(from a dynamic economy and interstate/international trade), to odd working hours(people working opposing schedules), to female emancipation(especially the "I don't need a man" attitude of feminists) have also pulled us further and further apart.


Whether or not Bachmann's mention of slavery in its context was insensitive or inappropriate, is a separate issue. I don't think what she said was intentionally mean-spirited, but I don't think it really the best way to argue her point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 05:13 PM
 
15,300 posts, read 7,816,724 times
Reputation: 7930
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
Much more intact to a degree, yes, however single parent homes have always been high in relative terms. From 1880 to 1960 the percentage remain constant at a rate of 30% when the rate began its climb to reached 60 percent where it has remained relatively constant, unlike white families which are experiencing single parent households at a rapidly increasing rate if 124% from 1960 to 1990.

Just wanted to say, that the above is correct and the increasing rate of all single parent households other than black households is growing at a much more rampant pace than those of black Americans.

It amazes me to see so many think that statistics are *****ty and are horrible for blacks but take no notice or don't even mention the fact that the largest increase by race in the single parent household statistic is white households.

That said, I do think the 70% is high. I also know because I am black that it has always been high, mostly as an after effect of slavery. In my own family in the 1800s and early 1900s we had single mothers. My grandma divorced my grandpa in the 50s and raised her kids by herself as well. It is nothing new, but it also has not become as trendy with blacks as it has in other demographics in this country and so it would be better to chastised white people if you are concerned with the rise in single parent households versus black households where it was already kind of the norm in many areas anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 05:18 PM
 
6,156 posts, read 4,136,868 times
Reputation: 1513
Quote:
Originally Posted by residinghere2007 View Post
That said, I do think the 70% is high. I also know because I am black that it has always been high, mostly as an after effect of slavery. In my own family in the 1800s and early 1900s we had single mothers.
This is not true at all. In the 60s it was around 30% I believe. I can dig up the stats if you'd like to see them.

That being said though, you are correct in your first point. The out of wedlock birth rate for white people has increased by a smaller percentage, however in multiples it has increased more than it has for blacks (I think around 5x since the 60s vs 2.5x for blacks).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 05:21 PM
 
Location: Thumb of Michigan
4,489 posts, read 6,774,364 times
Reputation: 2533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz View Post
Whether or not Bachmann's mention of slavery in its context was insensitive or inappropriate, is a separate issue. I don't think what she said was intentionally mean-spirited, but I don't think it really the best way to argue her point.
The problem with Michelle's analogy is that it is severely devoid of reasoning, understanding of history and logic to the extreme, much like her position on other things.

I wish someone would do an interview with her on television to have her walk step-by-step to how she comes to the reasoning of her positions. I would bet that her thought process is fractured.....that it would make one wince while listening to her.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 09:34 PM
 
Location: Maryland
18,614 posts, read 16,380,336 times
Reputation: 6343
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamBarrow View Post
This is not true at all. In the 60s it was around 30% I believe. I can dig up the stats if you'd like to see them.

That being said though, you are correct in your first point. The out of wedlock birth rate for white people has increased by a smaller percentage, however in multiples it has increased more than it has for blacks (I think around 5x since the 60s vs 2.5x for blacks).
I believe the out of wedlock rate was around 22% for Blacks in the early 60s and 2% for whites. The 22% is what caused alarm for Moniyan which in retrospect seems downright quaint.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 09:35 PM
 
Location: Maryland
18,614 posts, read 16,380,336 times
Reputation: 6343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Grass Fever View Post
The problem with Michelle's analogy is that it is severely devoid of reasoning, understanding of history and logic to the extreme, much like her position on other things.

I wish someone would do an interview with her on television to have her walk step-by-step to how she comes to the reasoning of her positions. I would bet that her thought process is fractured.....that it would make one wince while listening to her.
It's more quantitative based than qualitative and it's impossible to make a direct comparison. If they said the 1880s they would have been ok.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 09:43 PM
 
11,312 posts, read 7,313,356 times
Reputation: 4479
Please nominate Michelle Bachmann. I would put money down that Obama could take every state if he ran against her.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2011, 10:08 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 32,002,442 times
Reputation: 14896
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz View Post
Slaves were given a job, a place to live, they were fed, and clothed. Not very well, but there would be no reason for a slaveowner to mistreat his slaves,
It appears that slave era apologist have much in common with their Holocaust denial brethren.

"On one occasion I saw him take a slave, whose name was Pinkney, and make him take him off his shirt; he then tied his hands and gave him one hundred lashes on his bare back; and all this, because he lacked three pounds of his task, which was valued at six cents."
William Brown

[they used] to "drive nails into a hogshead so as to leave the point of the nail just protruding in the inside of the cask. Into this he used to put his slaves for punishment, and roll them down a very long and steep hill."


Moses Roper
"The ordinary punishments of slaves, for the common crimes of neglect, absence from work, eating the sugar cane, theft, are cart whipping, beating with a stick, sometimes to the breaking of bones, the chain, an iron crook about the neck... a ring about the ankle, and confinement in the dungeon. There have been instances of slitting of ears, breaking of limbs, so as to make amputation necessary, beating out of eyes, and castration... In short, in the place of decency, sympathy, morality,and religion; slavery produces cruelty and oppression. It is true, that the unfeeling application of the ordinary punishments ruins the constitution, and shortens the life of many a poor wretch."
James Ramsay
My master, pausing to take breath, one of the slaveholders said, "I would not flog him in that way, I would put him on a blacksmith's fire, and have the slaves to hold him until I blew the bellows to roast him alive." Then my master started again and flogged until the poor fellow was one mass of blood and raw flesh. The other was tied up and served in a similar manner, one of the slaveholders saying he ought to be tied to a tree and burnt alive. And now I would ask, How can an unarmed, an unorganized, degraded, cowed set of negroes prevent this treatment? The slaveholders can and do flog them to death, and nothing more is thought of it than of a dog being killed.
Francis Fredric, Fifty Years of Slavery (1863)

Twenty dollars reward. Runaway from the subscriber, a negro woman and two children; the woman is tall and black, and a few days before she went off burnt her on the left side of her face with the letter M. Her children are both boys, the oldest is in his seventh year; he is a mulatto and has blue eyes; the youngest is a black, and is in his fifth year.
Advertisement in the North Carolina Standard (28th July, 1838)
My pity for these poor boys was soon transferred to myself; for I was licked, and flogged, and pinched by her pitiless fingers in the neck and arms, exactly as they were. To strip me naked - to hang me up by the wrists and lay my flesh open with the cow-skin, was an ordinary punishment for even a slight offence. My mistress often robbed me too of the hours that belong to sleep. She used to sit up very late, frequently even until morning; and I had then to stand at a bench and wash during the greater part of the night, or pick wool and cotton; and often I have dropped down overcome by sleep and fatigue, till roused from a state of stupor by the whip, and forced to start up to my tasks.
Mary Prince,
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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:37 AM.

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