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.
This is not the first thread started bringing this information to our attention. It has also been mentioned in other threads about slavery in general. Blacks sold other blacks into slavery. Blacks owned other blacks as slaves.
Always missing from these presentations is anything which explains what it is that the poster who mentions these things, wants us to conclude as a consequence.
Because blacks shared in the crimes, all whites are excused?
That slavery in the US wasn't really race based?
That because some blacks were involved in the slave trade or owned slaves themselves, blacks deserved to be slaves?
What? What are we supposed to do with this information and why is it so important that it keeps getting raised on these pages so often?
This is not the first thread started bringing this information to our attention. It has also been mentioned in other threads about slavery in general. Blacks sold other blacks into slavery. Blacks owned other blacks as slaves.
Always missing from these presentations is anything which explains what it is that the poster who mentions these things, wants us to conclude as a consequence.
Because blacks shared in the crimes, all whites are excused?
That slavery in the US wasn't really race based?
That because some blacks were involved in the slave trade or owned slaves themselves, blacks deserved to be slaves?
What? What are we supposed to do with this information and why is it so important that it keeps getting raised on these pages so often?
This is not the first thread started bringing this information to our attention. It has also been mentioned in other threads about slavery in general. Blacks sold other blacks into slavery. Blacks owned other blacks as slaves.
Always missing from these presentations is anything which explains what it is that the poster who mentions these things, wants us to conclude as a consequence.
Because blacks shared in the crimes, all whites are excused?
That slavery in the US wasn't really race based?
That because some blacks were involved in the slave trade or owned slaves themselves, blacks deserved to be slaves?
What? What are we supposed to do with this information and why is it so important that it keeps getting raised on these pages so often?
As stated in post 1, it just seems high to me. Thank you for interjecting all the normal crap that goes along with slavery threads. None of which really has anything to do with anything. There is no pro or anti social justice warrior angle.
It's a discussion, not an attempt to right wrongs, assign blame/guilt, or any other bull****. It's no secret blacks were involved in the slave trade from every direction, this is not news to anyone. I am surprised by the numbers; that's it, that's all.
Thanks for your trolling post though. have a nice day.
It is a modern day myth that slavery only involved white Americans enslaving blacks. In fact, almost all American slaves were first enslaved by black Africans before being sold to white Americans. Slavery was a way of life for Africans. That is why they rarely rebelled against their slave-owners and why they were so highly prized as slaves. It would not have been against most black Americans' consciousness to enslave a fellow black.
The only 'modern day myth' is the one you're peddling - that black ownership of slaves is a virtually unknown historical reality, that supposedly almost no one is aware of this 'gotcha!' fact you think you're springing on the unsuspecting and the astonished.
The distinguished black historian Henry Louis Gates, Jr, has published a long article in The Root (an African-American magazine) about black ownership of slaves. Black Slave Owners: Did They Exist? - The Root
The pre-article summary on Wikipedia will inform you that slaves were purchased in Africa from Africans, and in the article itself are sections such as African participation in the slave trade and African conflicts, wherein it is explained in detail how Africans enslaved Africans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Africa
Go to Amazon and search on 'black slave owners' - you'll have your choice of many books covering in detail this subject you think almost no one knows about. Or google 'blacks owned slaves' to find tons of hits (a sizable lot of them from positively gleeful white supremacists, apparently having taken a break from their usual screeds about how the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery and whatnot, trumpeting the fact that there were some blacks who owned slaves).
I could go on and on. This simply is not a myth of any sort but a widely known fact.
319,599 free persons of color, 3,776 owned slaves that is 1.18% of free persons of color who were slave owners.
2 million slaves, free persons of color owned .6% of the total.
And that is before we even begin to examine who was considered a free person of color. For example "black" slave owner Antoine P. DuBuclet
Nor have we explored a state by state examination of manumission laws, how those laws changed over time and the impact of those laws on residency.
Instead we are left with this absurd statistical flim flam that tries to argue that by taking the percentage of slave owning free persons of color we can makes some comparison with regional or national totals. Of course such an analysis doesn't for a second take into consideration the very exceptional history of slavery and uniquely complex classification system that free persons of color lived under.
Quote:
Thank you for interjecting all the normal crap that goes along with slavery threads.
Well that's what happens when you mangle your statistics, link to a white supremacist website, quote "research" by a civil war revisionist and don't make the slightest effort to explain or defend your comments.
PS - the most absolutely appalling sin of the Grooms article is how he has attempted to mis-characterize the research of the late Dr. John Hope Franklin Professor Emeritus of Duke University and the preeminent historian of 19th century African American history.
As stated in post 1, it just seems high to me. Thank you for interjecting all the normal crap that goes along with slavery threads. None of which really has anything to do with anything. There is no pro or anti social justice warrior angle.
It's a discussion, not an attempt to right wrongs, assign blame/guilt, or any other bull****. It's no secret blacks were involved in the slave trade from every direction, this is not news to anyone. I am surprised by the numbers; that's it, that's all.
Thanks for your trolling post though. have a nice day.
I see, if you are in anyway challenged, it can only be by a troll. Character assassination is far easier than actually responding to questions.
And it also serves to distract from the fact that you are evading the question. "Just seems high to me" is a statement which is devoid of any meaning for the readers here. It implies that there is a proper amount and this figure was exceeded. Therefore, please inform us of that proper amount. If you do not know, then of course you would be in no position to know if the figure was high or low, would you?
You were "surprised by the numbers, that's all" you write. Really? You were so stunned that you felt that you had to report this shocker to the forum members, but you had no other purpose? You believed that getting this information out here was so important that it trumped any concerns about using a manifestly racist website as your information source? You felt it was so vital to educate us with this one fact that you don't mind letting the rest of us know that you patronize such a site?
So let me state flatly that I do not believe you. All of the peripheral evidence suggests that you have an agenda and that it is something which you fear will bring you a great deal of criticism were you to be open about it.
You can try and bully your way out of this with insults and characterizations, I don't see you fooling anyone here.
I see, if you are in anyway challenged, it can only be by a troll. Character assassination is far easier than actually responding to questions.
And it also serves to distract from the fact that you are evading the question. "Just seems high to me" is a statement which is devoid of any meaning for the readers here. It implies that there is a proper amount and this figure was exceeded. Therefore, please inform us of that proper amount. If you do not know, then of course you would be in no position to know if the figure was high or low, would you?
You were "surprised by the numbers, that's all" you write. Really? You were so stunned that you felt that you had to report this shocker to the forum members, but you had no other purpose? You believed that getting this information out here was so important that it trumped any concerns about using a manifestly racist website as your information source? You felt it was so vital to educate us with this one fact that you don't mind letting the rest of us know that you patronize such a site?
So let me state flatly that I do not believe you. All of the peripheral evidence suggests that you have an agenda and that it is something which you fear will bring you a great deal of criticism were you to be open about it.
You can try and bully your way out of this with insults and characterizations, I don't see you fooling anyone here.
That's a mighty big chip you're balancing there.
If this is such a manifestly racist website - which it is not - why peruse it?
This is actually ancient history...you knew that fact, right?
The denial is strong in this one. The blinders are working just fine.
You can't deny that which doesn't exist, for example, substantive argument to the contrary.
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.
