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 10-28-2012, 02:03 PM
 
Location: Beautiful Niagara Falls ON.
10,018 posts, read 11,311,156 times
Reputation: 8964

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by smittyjohnny38 View Post
Address the issue or sh8t up.

OK, the issue is that you don't have a single clue of what reality is. I have not seen many OPs on city data that approach ther total stupidity of this one.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-28-2012, 02:12 PM
 
2,117 posts, read 1,683,423 times
Reputation: 1122
Quote:
Originally Posted by smittyjohnny38 View Post
while the forebears of their Black and Muslim classmates were busy fighting tooth and nail to keep the institution alive in other parts of the world? If it had have been Muslims and not Europeans who had abolished the slave trade, this would be the focus of much celebration and fanfare. It is only White children who are systematically stripped of their dignity and self-worth and made to loathe their history and their people. Only White children are publicly humiliated in such a way.
Oh, you dirty, dirty racist!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2012, 02:19 PM
 
Location: Chicago
938 posts, read 800,929 times
Reputation: 531
Quote:
Originally Posted by smittyjohnny38 View Post
while the forebears of their Black and Muslim classmates were busy fighting tooth and nail to keep the institution alive in other parts of the world? If it had have been Muslims and not Europeans who had abolished the slave trade, this would be the focus of much celebration and fanfare. It is only White children who are systematically stripped of their dignity and self-worth and made to loathe their history and their people. Only White children are publicly humiliated in such a way.
Wait... What? How old are you? Are you claiming that white children are shunned for being descendants of slave owners and slave freers?
What in the world is wrong with you?
Some men just want to watch the world burn... In stupid arguments.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2012, 03:06 PM
 
31,371 posts, read 33,825,860 times
Reputation: 14928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
Why don't we keep in mind that most white Europeans and white Americans have pretty much nothing in common and neither do most black Americans and black persons from other parts of the world?

You mean other than one side believing that they still have the right to control the world while the other side tends to disagree with that belief?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2012, 03:43 PM
 
Location: NW Nevada
16,210 posts, read 13,022,772 times
Reputation: 14846
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
Oh, please. The OP is whining because white children are being forced to learn the history of their country, and he's worried that it's going to damage their self-esteem because they aren't being taught that it was their white ancestors who fought to end slavery? Seriously? I don't know where he went to school, but I was taught that the majority of soldiers who fought in the Civil War were white, so it's a bogus claim. And then he feels the need to throw in Muslims a few times for good measure.

The OP's entire post is a racist diatribe. Sorry if you're offended that I call it like I see it.
Well, if you think a little bit about it, it's not a racist diatribe so much as being sick of "white guilt" and "white apologists ". Least thatz my take on it.
It is true that the majority of soldiers, Union and Confederate, in Tbe War between tbe States were white. Point there somewhere? It is also true that very few of the soldiers, blue or gray, cared a whit about slavery.
The folks teaching our history to our kids need a history lesson themselves. Look, being unapologetic for the evils of tbe past is NOT automatically a racist trait. I make no apologies and feel zero guilt about slavery or anything else my anceztors may or may not have had a hand in. Sorry if tbat offends some folks (not really) but thats the way it was and it cant be undone. Time to get over it all.
We should teach history as it really was, not how an elitist few think it should have been or want it to be. Fact is, any other than whites used to be considered as less in the US. And many who were white were considered less as well. Ol' Honest Abe was no saint on this, and neither was 99% of the Union army and populace of the North.
If not drowning in guilt over that makes me a racist...well...guess I'm gonna swing....
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2012, 04:35 PM
 
Location: Ohio
22,798 posts, read 15,998,829 times
Reputation: 19288
Quote:
Originally Posted by smittyjohnny38 View Post
Why dont we celebrate the fact that ancestors of white children in America shed blood to officially end slavery
Because that would be an outrageous lie.

Instead of telling you why the Civil War was fought, I'll let Abraham Lincoln tell you in his own words...

"...to preserve this Union."

There's a couple of very nice on-line dictionaries and thesauri. You might want to use them when you read the Emancipation Proclamation.

The Proclamation freed no slaves. If you don't understand why, I'll refer you back to this....

"There's a couple of very nice on-line dictionaries and thesauri. You might want to use them when you read the Emancipation Proclamation."

If you know of any slaves who were freed, please send me a message immediately, because you will be the only person on Earth who does, and I'm fairly well connected and can get us on talk shows on radio and TV, plus the lecture circuit etc and we will drink champagne and make a helluva lot of money.

Historically...

Mircea
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2012, 10:32 PM
 
Location: Cushing OK
14,545 posts, read 18,945,104 times
Reputation: 16886
Default some history here....

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeyJude514 View Post
Oh, please. The OP is whining because white children are being forced to learn the history of their country, and he's worried that it's going to damage their self-esteem because they aren't being taught that it was their white ancestors who fought to end slavery? Seriously? I don't know where he went to school, but I was taught that the majority of soldiers who fought in the Civil War were white, so it's a bogus claim. And then he feels the need to throw in Muslims a few times for good measure.

The OP's entire post is a racist diatribe. Sorry if you're offended that I call it like I see it.
A few reality checks. The majority of soldiers on both sides were white. In the south the majority of them were poor because the majority of the south was poor. On the northern side, a lot were very recent immigrants. However the reason for the bloodshed was NOT to free the slaves. It was to reclaim the states which declared for succession. Along the way, it was going to follow that things would change for those held as slaves and as they would not be given back to the rebellionists conquered. The fate of freed slaves was something nobody had any though out plans about.

And it wasn't racist. The muslem comment could have been left out. But the reality is that few people ever owned a slave and of that only a tiny minority of slave holders had more than a few. The dogma seems to be that 'all whites' by default are responsible. And when dogma is preached, I doubt ANY of the participants have ever read a book about the time and the real world that existed then.

Always distrust that kind of dogma. Anytime you see a term with an 'all' attached to it remember there is no such thing and the author has an agenda.

A few more reality checks. The first 'unfree' labor system in the colonies was of indentured persons. For about half, through the 1600's and into the 1700's it was a life sentence since they died before the time of release. Some sold themselves voluntarily. Many were 'pressed' or cleared out of poor houses or just kidnapped, as well as Irish and Scots rebels. The early days, regardless of the source as africans where purchased from foreigh traders, and then indentured, they were treated virutally identical, dressed the same, punished the same and housed together. Aside from whipping, which was considered just a normal thing, time was added for large and small infractions, thus making an indenture of seven years more likely to stretch on far longer.

In the Carrabean, the first shipped were the Irish. The indenture was in some cases for life and children born of an indentured woman were for at minimum until the child was twenty one. The mother usually stayed with the child. Later, some were lifetime. It wasn't done that way in the more northern American colonies. The usual was seven years, but the usual was that got extended so as to save having to replace them so soon.

Slavery grew out of that system. All the slave catching methods, and fugative laws came out of the earlier era. Frequently both white and black 'unfree' (as was the time's reference) ran together. In around 1680, a rebellion took place in Maryland which very nearly unseated the government headed by Francis Bacon. A former indentured, he captured the passion of not only the those held as 'unfree' but the mass of unhappy former unfree. The land given at the end was generally worthless and sometimes cheated out by demanding survey money before a deed. The gap into Kentucky was available and some took that opition, but not as many as later. Thus the colony of Maryland had a developing gentry and a lot of poor. It failed largely because he was killed, but led to the next phase.

Black servants were much more expensive than white servants. (the usual reference of the time to both was slaves). And Bacon had done so well because the entire economic sub level had reason to support him. Thus, the seperation began. This included, eventually, seperate quarters, dress, and work. It would have continued on like this, except a new ship was perfected which could carry over twice the 'cargo'. This made africans much cheaper. They survived better and over decades became the predominant. White convicts, as British goals were vastly overcrowded, were added to the mix usually sent to labor with black field workers as they were 'lesser'.

But to stem the tide of escapes, one of the differences was in penalties for escape. For blacks is was greater. Three 'servants' had escaped, two white and one black, all with repeated escapes. All were repeatedly whipped, which was just normal, but when it came to penalties, things were different. One of the white men was lightly punished. He is likely to have given documents to the court that the other white man had led the plot. That man was given a large extension to his time, and then would be held as indentured to the state for an additional years. The time was likely to be near life, so all they could do was sentence the black escapee to life. This was the first recorded offical 'enslavement' but that was not the term used.

So lets not play race and say that slavery should be recognized as the descended of the earlier system (which is barely mentioned at all, and inaccurately at that) and that it was not so simple an evolution. The owner of record of these three unfortunates was also black.

A really good book about the beginnings is White Cargo by Don Jordan and Michael Walsh.

Forced Indentures were not made illegal until slavery was outlawed in the 13th amendment. The case which ended the chain gangs was based on that abolition as it was based upon a 'fine' which could not be paid.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2012, 10:46 PM
 
Location: Cushing OK
14,545 posts, read 18,945,104 times
Reputation: 16886
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmagoo View Post
Were white families torn apart and sold in the slave markets? Just asking.
Before American slavery developed, it was common to kidnap children off the streets of London, along the road in Ireland and so forth. Even if the parents found them they were never given back. The people who did this were called press gangs, and liked older children as they were much easier to control. The children ended up on ships bound for the ports of the Carrabien and American colonies where they were sold in the square for labor. Yes, it wasn't a lifetime sentence offically, but in reality the vast majoriety died which laboring. Children were favored as well since they automatically had to remain until twenty one, in some places older. The first two shipments to Maryland were of such children. Less than two years later all of them were dead from the abuse of the tabbacco fields.

If people are considered 'Excess population' they were open to use and abuse. The Irish especially were likened to animals.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2012, 10:50 PM
 
Location: Southern California
15,084 posts, read 18,595,349 times
Reputation: 10321
Quote:
Originally Posted by smittyjohnny38 View Post
while the forebears of their Black and Muslim classmates were busy fighting tooth and nail to keep the institution alive in other parts of the world? If it had have been Muslims and not Europeans who had abolished the slave trade, this would be the focus of much celebration and fanfare. It is only White children who are systematically stripped of their dignity and self-worth and made to loathe their history and their people. Only White children are publicly humiliated in such a way.
Oh, the humiliation...!!

[right...]
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2012, 11:17 PM
 
18,847 posts, read 33,871,554 times
Reputation: 26255
I believe we do celebrate the ancestors who shed blood to end slavery...that would be, "Veterans Day"...November 11. While Veterans Day was not established until after WW I....the intent is to honor all veterans. Abraham Lincoln established the first Veterans Homes, and health care for veterans..."to care for those who have bourne battle "...thank all veterans for their service...including Civil War veterans.
Rate this post positively 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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top