Special Snowflakes Armed With Clubs, Sticks, Rocks -- Attack Cars, Block TriMet (Portland: title, mayor)

[Yankeemama]

Why was the Women's March thread closed but this one is not? Hmmm...

[Sherwoody]

Originally Posted by Yankeemama

Why was the Women's March thread closed but this one is not? Hmmm...

Politics.

[OneTimeSEALover]

Originally Posted by Metlakatla

Here's another history lesson -- the Boston Tea Party participants believed in the right to own slaves, the subjugation of women, and a whole lot of other rights specific only to that day's equivalent of "men in suits." You couldn't even own property in their America unless you were a "man in a suit." ETA that's meant figuratively just for those who don't get the analogy.

Not having a march permit or a designating a specific route gave the cops all they needed (another history lesson -- cops in riot gear didn't exist in the Boston Tea Party days). It was a stupid move that seemed deliberately designed to result in Portland's usual cluster. The march yesterday did nothing to further your cause. If anything, it just made you look bad -- again.

Show me WHO in the Boston Tea Party believed in the right to own slaves. I know about Jefferson and Washington. But they were Virginians. The BTP was people from Massachussetts. So I'm thinking you are up against it finding historical support to naming BTP participants who believe what you say they believe.

[Yankeemama]

Originally Posted by Sherwoody

Politics.

Seriously, how is this thread still going but the Women's March was closed when we weren't arguing? The Portland Pilice and City Of Portland should be interested that the moderators here want to keep talking about violent protests but don't want to show the world that peaceful marches are possible here in Portland. Why is this thread about violence still going? Something is wrong. NYC Forum and Los Angeles Forum haven't closed their Women's March threads.

[Metlakatla]

Originally Posted by OneTimeSEALover

Show me WHO in the Boston Tea Party believed in the right to own slaves. I know about Jefferson and Washington. But they were Virginians. The BTP was people from Massachussetts. So I'm thinking you are up against it finding historical support to naming BTP participants who believe what you say they believe.

It took about three minutes to find historical support for the fact that Massachusetts was one the New England states with a large slave owning population both prior to and after the Revolutionary War (even if I hadn't already learned that information in school). Ten-percent of Boston's population was comprised of slaves, and the city was a major slave trading port. Please spare me any further "history" lessons.

[annoyingcherry]

Originally Posted by Metlakatla

It took about three minutes to find historical support for the fact that Massachusetts was one the New England states with a large slave owning population both prior to and after the Revolutionary War (even if I hadn't already learned that information in school). Ten-percent of Boston's population was comprised of slaves, and the city was a major slave trading port. Please spare me any further "history" lessons.

Zero slaves in Massachusetts by the 1790 census-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1790_United_States_Census

[Metlakatla]

I think this is illustrative of why Wikipedia isn't considered a reliable source. Scholarly sources tell a different story, and one of them touches on the difficulty of determining actual numbers of slaves in Massachusetts because they were listed as servants on census reports when they were slaves in actuality. That makes sense because abolitionist sentiment was becoming increasingly well represented in Massachusetts and because a series of legislative and legal events essentially rendered slavery illegal although it was still practiced. Finally, the Wiki census date is from 1790, and the time frame in question was specific to the Boston Tea Party.


Slavery in Massachusetts

Slavery in Massachusetts – History of Massachusetts Blog

Slavery in Colonial New England | Arlington Historical Society

[Sherwoody]

Originally Posted by Yankeemama

Seriously, how is this thread still going but the Women's March was closed when we weren't arguing? The Portland Pilice and City Of Portland should be interested that the moderators here want to keep talking about violent protests but don't want to show the world that peaceful marches are possible here in Portland. Why is this thread about violence still going? Something is wrong. NYC Forum and Los Angeles Forum haven't closed their Women's March threads.

I was hoping it was just temporary, but it appears not to be the case. I didn't have anything to add to the thread, but I did appreciate some the information provided by you and others that attended. Perhaps a senior Mod can be queried.

[Merrily Gather]

I'd put it down to the number of accounts bickering back and forth in said thread over the same thing vs this one. Plus the outrageous and morbid claims that probably were reported and drew attention. Though the very title of this thread is a troll post they've since orphaned it leaving it open for discussion.

[Yankeemama]

Originally Posted by Merry Lee Gather

I'd put it down to the number of accounts bickering back and forth in said thread over the same thing vs this one. Plus the outrageous and morbid claims that probably were reported and drew attention. Though the very title of this thread is a troll post they've since orphaned it leaving it open for discussion.

At the end of the thread we were all saying very positive things about the March especially the non- violence so why is this thread still open? Both events are over and this thread has splintered all over. Makes you scratch your head. The largest city forums such as LA and NYC still had their threads on the Women's March open so what is going on with Portland. The moderator won't get back to me. Closing a thread when everyone is getting along seems like censorship.