400 years of Slavery?

[IM2]

.
She's not teaching shit. Those llke you made up his bullshit about us using the past as an excuse. As a person who built 3 organizations, helped kids go from gang members to college graduates, helped men and women get off drugs and helped people develop and grow businesses, I can say this woman is full of shit. What you are is irrelevant to me. I've been a success and I did it by not forgetting the past but using it to not only improve my life but change damages cause by past policies in a couple of cities that improved he lives of over 200,0000 people. I know what I'm talking about and there is no one black doing what this woman claims. Period.

All complete angry nonsense.

Dismissed

So you can't take it when a person really thinks outside the box.

You're not thinking outside the box. You are JUDGING everyone you disagree with.

You're an idiot and I doubt the validity of most of your story.

I've judged no one. You have. Want an example?

What a bunch of bullshit. There is a HUGE difference in learning from your past and using it as an excuse for your future.
And THAT woman is successful WITHOUT wallowing in the past. She is trying to teach people that the past does neither define who you are or what you can accomplish.
I am living, breathing proof of her position.
From the ghetto to prison to successful business owner.
You have a choice in life. Seize your youth and create opportunities for yourself via education and hard work, or wallow in the misery of what could have been.

I don't give a damn what you doubt. I know what I have done.

I'm 57. I seized my youth and have helped many others seize theirs. I was seizing youth long before that silly ho was born..

You're saying I judged you yet nowhere in your highlighted text do I even mention you.

As I said earlier, YOU ARE DISMISSED

You're an idiot and I doubt the validity of most of your story.

You see you called me an idiot but that's not judging oh no. I'm am idiot because I don't buy into this kids lie. She's 28, I was 29 when she was born. I've lived double her life and I can say what I do with confidence. She talks about victimization and she tells blacks how we should not think as victims and how much we weren't slaves, but then we see this:
.
Born to an African American family and raised in Stamford, Connecticut, she is a graduate of Stamford High School.In 2007, while a senior in high school, she received hurtful and threatening racist phone calls that were traced to a car in which the son of Governor Dannel Malloy was present. Owens' family sued the Stamford Board of Education in federal court alleging that the city did not protect her rights, resulting in a $37,500 settlement.

She was damn sure a victim then wasn't she. She was full black victim, she was little Miss oppressed Candice and she got $37,500 for her oppression.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

All complete angry nonsense.

Dismissed

So you can't take it when a person really thinks outside the box.

You're not thinking outside the box. You are JUDGING everyone you disagree with.

You're an idiot and I doubt the validity of most of your story.

I've judged no one. You have. Want an example?

What a bunch of bullshit. There is a HUGE difference in learning from your past and using it as an excuse for your future.
And THAT woman is successful WITHOUT wallowing in the past. She is trying to teach people that the past does neither define who you are or what you can accomplish.
I am living, breathing proof of her position.
From the ghetto to prison to successful business owner.
You have a choice in life. Seize your youth and create opportunities for yourself via education and hard work, or wallow in the misery of what could have been.

I don't give a damn what you doubt. I know what I have done.

I'm 57. I seized my youth and have helped many others seize theirs. I was seizing youth long before that silly ho was born..

You're saying I judged you yet nowhere in your highlighted text do I even mention you.

As I said earlier, YOU ARE DISMISSED

You're an idiot and I doubt the validity of most of your story.

You see you called me an idiot but that's not judging oh no. I'm am idiot because I don't buy into this kids lie. She's 28, I was 29 when she was born. I've lived double her life and I can say what I do with confidence. She talks about victimization and she tells blacks how we should not think as victims and how much we weren't slaves, but then we see this:
.
Born to an African American family and raised in Stamford, Connecticut, she is a graduate of Stamford High School.In 2007, while a senior in high school, she received hurtful and threatening racist phone calls that were traced to a car in which the son of Governor Dannel Malloy was present. Owens' family sued the Stamford Board of Education in federal court alleging that the city did not protect her rights, resulting in a $37,500 settlement.

She was damn sure a victim then wasn't she. She was full black victim, she was little Miss oppressed Candice and she got $37,500 for her oppression.

That's right, it's all about you. No one else could possibly be experiencing life today. Everything happening NOW is all relative to you and only you.

Her parents sueing someone =/= her getting paid while she was a minor.
If you did deep enough you will also see that she initially supported Obama.

 

[MikeK]

I talk about this stuff fairly often with my black neighbors & friends.

So you are incorrect

It seems your Black neighbors and friends are exceptions while TCL is talking about the rule.

I've known some Blacks who are critical of the position held by the vast majority of their fellow American Blacks, much of which is hostile toward Whites and has become increasingly militant -- with special emphasis on Blacks in their adolescence to mid-30s. Because it plainly appears that this militant hostility on the part of Blacks has substantially increased in proportion with the rise of Muslim aggression against Whites I can no longer inhabit my formerly neutral, wholly unbiased and impartial position in the issue of race relations. I believe it is no longer prudent to do so.

I've become aware that Whites in America are moving inexorably toward becoming an ethnic minority, which would not be a problem were it not for the fact that a substantial percentage of American Blacks are assuming a vindictive posture and seem eager to take aggressive advantage of the impending demographic shift. Simply stated, they are looking forward to an opportunity to get even with Whitey and there is undeniable evidence of that objective in the statistical rise in Black-on-White violence.

What I'm saying is the kumbaya, come-together nonsense has not only failed but has been replaced by the threat of impending widespread racial warfare.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

wonder not - RW's would be content with another 400 years of owing slaves.

I would be more content if you would just go to the bottom of the ocean and stay there. I would rather work for myself than have some shit like you working for me.

you couldnt afford me.

You are right, I cannot afford an asshole who sits around all day doing nothing expecting minimum wages, and produces squat.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I talk about this stuff fairly often with my black neighbors & friends.

So you are incorrect

It seems your Black neighbors and friends are exceptions while TCL is talking about the rule.

I've known some Blacks who are critical of the position held by the vast majority of their fellow American Blacks, much of which is hostile toward Whites and has become increasingly militant -- with special emphasis on Blacks in their adolescence to mid-30s. Because it plainly appears that this militant hostility on the part of Blacks has substantially increased in proportion with the rise of Muslim aggression against Whites I can no longer inhabit my formerly neutral, wholly unbiased and impartial position in the issue of race relations. I believe it is no longer prudent to do so.

I've become aware that Whites in America are moving inexorably toward becoming an ethnic minority, which would not be a problem were it not for the fact that a substantial percentage of American Blacks are assuming a vindictive posture and seem eager to take aggressive advantage of the impending demographic shift. Simply stated, they are looking forward to an opportunity to get even with Whitey and there is undeniable evidence of that objective in the statistical rise in Black-on-White violence.

What I'm saying is the kumbaya, come-together nonsense has not only failed but has been replaced by the threat of impending widespread racial warfare.

What people like you don't realize, is that 33,000 liberal babies are aborted a month with 35% of them being black. Black on black crime is happening in the inner cities, thus also culling the unwanted liberals, that Margaret Sanger had called them. How can the black ever become a majority when they are being, well, "black". You can take the black person out of Africa, but you cant take the African out of black people.

The blacks that do use their white privilege to move out of the ghetto, end up being called Uncle Toms, Oreos, and other demeaning names, by the liberals who supposedly support blacks.

 

[Kondor3]

...What people like you don't realize, is that 33,000 liberal babies are aborted a month with 35% of them being black. Black on black crime is happening in the inner cities, thus also culling the unwanted liberals, that Margaret Sanger had called them. How can the black ever become a majority when they are being, well, "black". You can take the black person out of Africa, but you cant take the African out of black people.

The blacks that do use their white privilege to move out of the ghetto, end up being called Uncle Toms, Oreos, and other demeaning names, by the liberals who supposedly support blacks.

Of course Liberals denigrate Blacks who move out of all-Black communities and into the wider world beyond...

Such self-liberating Blacks are no longer in thrall to Liberal Largesse and can no longer be herded and controlled properly...

"Chump don't want da hep... chump don't get da hep... jive-ass dude don't got no brains nohow..."

Hell hath no fury like a Liberal scorned.

----------------------

I wouldn't worry too much about the Blacks, though...

They've slipped way back in the pack, to Third Place, in the racial demographic marathon in the US.

Even in the public eye, they're losing their status as Dominant Minority; their power and influence is on the wane.

Frankly, the Obumble administration wasn't the dawn of a new era, it was the sunset of an old one.

Nowadays, Hispanics have pulled ahead into Second Place, with 17% of the population, vs. the Black segment, which is still stuck on 12%.

Hispanics are a lot closer to White Anglo-Saxon traditions and culture than Blacks, and Hispanics work a helluva lot harder, too.

Generally speaking, groups of people with a reputation for initiative and drive and hard work, gradually drift towards Conservatism.

It might take a generation or two, but they'll get there - hell, we already see a lot of Hispanics as Centrists, taking-up the Middle Ground.[/QUOTE]

 

[alang1216]

There's no such thing as "your reality" and "my reality". Reality, by definition, is what actually IS, no matter who's viewing it.

Hasn't USMB taught you anything? Look at how people view Trump. To some he is a hero, to others he is Satan. Same reality but that matters less than perception.

 

[alang1216]

Please explain the higher percent of blacks killed compared to their actual population numbers.

Is there any actual, logical, reality-based reason why the numbers should be the same?

In a color blind society I would expect the percentages of blacks killed by cops to be the same as for all other groups but that is not the case in this country. Some people lay all the blame on the cops, others put all the blame on the victims. I feelz that is too simplistic and neither is the sole cause, it is vastly more complex. It is a mixture of racial prejudice and cultural bias mixed in with history, geography, drugs, and mass media.

 

[harmonica]

blacks are so obsessed with color that it warps their minds

Then why are you still talking about it?

...I would never ever talk about race--except for the fact there are numerous lies/myths/falsehoods/etc about race/racism on many forums and the MSM
...I am responding to those posts from people who are obsessed with race

 

[harmonica]

YOU are the racist by calling them racist

That's weak.

please prove the majority of RWs are racists on USMB--I'll be waiting

If I were represented by someone like Shoot Speeders, Snouter or Steve McGarrett and said nothing about their idiotic simple minded racist views then my only excuse is that I agree with them. Until you kick them out of your little clique you agree with them.

I was with you till the last sentence. Unless you are willing to apply guilt by association to Obama for Rev Wright as well.

Ignore works wonders but you people still claim I agree with the tards because I dont continually condemn them when they say something asinine. Thing is I don't ever see their posts to begin with.

Remind me again, what racist statement did Wright make?

There's white racist DNA running through the synapses of his or her brain tissue. They will kill their own kind, defend the enemies of their kind or anyone who is perceived to be the enemy of the milky white way of life.

Jeremiah Wright

"Them Jews aren't going to let (Obama) talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he'll talk to me in five years when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office. ...They will not let him talk to somebody who calls a spade what it is." - Jeremiah Wright

etc etc

TOP 25 QUOTES BY JEREMIAH WRIGHT | A-Z Quotes

Before Obama was president. I'm curious, the one you quoted was after the election.

what are you saying? Wright became racist after Obama became POTUS

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Black folks have suffered generational problems that are the result of slavery.

Everybody needs to stop denying that FACT.

Families were ripped apart because of slavery. Husband and wife sold to different owners. Children were taken from mothers and sold, never to see their mothers again. This type of breakdown of the family unit causes problems that last for decades and generations. Strong black family units with a husband and wife raising children were less stable from that time forward, which continued and still continues, because it is a cycle that is difficult to break.

Add to that, black folks were still not given full participation in society as equals until the 1960s.

What pisses me off is that the Democrats have perpetuated those problems, have promised to help, and have done NOTHING to really help the black community. Democrat policies have created society where a black man is unnecessary to the financial success of a family. Marriages or relationships that would have been necessary to survive for the financial benefit of the children have become unnecessary. Mothers of multiple children can survive without the help of a partner because government has replaced the father.

The way to fix this (other than never voting for democrats) is to find options to help as many black men as possible to start and run successful businesses. Several generations of this type of success will do MUCH MORE to fix problems than welfare can. Many large businesses would be willing to contribute to that cause.

 

[Cecilie1200]

And yes the first slaves in America were white from Britain and Ireland. Historical fact.

That's true. But I understand the conditions of servitude were different, i.e. the Black Africans were sold into chattel slavery, meaning ownership under the same terms as inanimate property, while the Irish were transferred by the British into bonded servitude, meaning they were able to earn their freedom after a number of years in service.

Yeah . . . no. Yet another example of a simplistic, vagued-up idea of American history replacing the effort needed to learn the REAL, often complicated, history.

People like to pretend that, because there WERE indentured servants in the US, ALL white people in bondage in the US were indentured servants. However, indentured servitude is a voluntary contractual agreement, and it is documented history - although not WELL documented, since far too many people have a vested interest in preserving slavery as a special province of blacks - that English kings such as James II and Charles I made a practice of selling Irish political prisoners as slaves. And when the wives and children of Irish men sold into slavery became destitute and unable to feed themselves, they were also auctioned off into slavery.

Again, this is all sanitized and disguised as "indentured servants". But as the vast majority of these people did not choose to enter into this state and had no option available to win free of it, since it became extremely common to forcibly breed Irish women against their will in order to create even more "indentured servants" - since the law at that time was that the free status or lack thereof of a child was derived from the mother's status - since these people could be, and all too often were, tortured and maimed and killed for disobedience, I don't think an honest person can describe it as anything other than slavery.

 

[Dschrute3]

And then there's this Democrat weirdo. Pretending to be an African American? WHAAA??

 

[jc456]

It is a reference to ideological tunnel vision & generations of being bound by a thought process that prohibits thinking outside the box.



This is the origins of that comment and while the number could be considered off if you discount the history of Africa the point remains on target.

Rather than dig into the substance of the situation the left would rather distract you with the thoughts of a simpleton.

While this could be considered a "race" thread I hope that the moderators see that it is a hot topic in political circles and deserves to be discussed and thought out rather than relegated to the race forum which very few visit.

I think the legacy of slavery is still felt in Black families but Blacks today do seem to be victims of the criminal justice system. We've all seen videos of Blacks being shot by cops and read about abuses in assigning bail and prison sentences. It is unfortunate but understandable that many Blacks consider themselves victims.

most of the blacks shot by cops are justified/self defense shootings

Justified by whom?
Anytime a cop shoots someone, they’re all “I feared for my life”. Like the unarmed guy crawling on his belly who was lit up because he reached down to pull up his pants. Trigger happy cops are just that — trigger happy

if you want I'll go over it case by case
by legal, fair, courts systems with MUCH more evidence than you have

Nah I’m all set with your excuses for being a boot licker. Some officer involved shootings are no doubt justified, but to claim that all are justified is just ridiculous.

so is every DOJ or FBI investigation justified? WACO for instance? why do you government boot lickers feel cops are different than the DOJ/ FBI?

 

[The Original Tree]

I thought this thread was going to be about the 400 years The Jews were Slaves in Egypt.

 

[alang1216]

And yes the first slaves in America were white from Britain and Ireland. Historical fact.

That's true. But I understand the conditions of servitude were different, i.e. the Black Africans were sold into chattel slavery, meaning ownership under the same terms as inanimate property, while the Irish were transferred by the British into bonded servitude, meaning they were able to earn their freedom after a number of years in service.

Yeah . . . no. Yet another example of a simplistic, vagued-up idea of American history replacing the effort needed to learn the REAL, often complicated, history.

People like to pretend that, because there WERE indentured servants in the US, ALL white people in bondage in the US were indentured servants. However, indentured servitude is a voluntary contractual agreement, and it is documented history - although not WELL documented, since far too many people have a vested interest in preserving slavery as a special province of blacks - that English kings such as James II and Charles I made a practice of selling Irish political prisoners as slaves. And when the wives and children of Irish men sold into slavery became destitute and unable to feed themselves, they were also auctioned off into slavery.

Again, this is all sanitized and disguised as "indentured servants". But as the vast majority of these people did not choose to enter into this state and had no option available to win free of it, since it became extremely common to forcibly breed Irish women against their will in order to create even more "indentured servants" - since the law at that time was that the free status or lack thereof of a child was derived from the mother's status - since these people could be, and all too often were, tortured and maimed and killed for disobedience, I don't think an honest person can describe it as anything other than slavery.

Like impoverished people of other nationalities, many emigrated from Ireland to the Americas in the 17th and 18th centuries as indentured servants; a smaller number were forcibly banished into indentured servitude during the period of the English Civil Wars; indentured servants often lived and worked under harsh conditions and were sometimes treated cruelly.

Unlike institutionalized chattel slavery, indentured servitude was neither hereditary nor lifelong; unlike black slaves, white indentured servants had legal rights; unlike black slaves, indentured servants weren't considered property.

Limerick-based research librarian and historian Liam Hogan wrote a series of papers debunking what he calls “the Irish slaves myth.” There were no Irish slaves in the Americas, Hogan says. People who claim there were are conflating indentured servitude with chattel slavery — two distinct forms of servitude with more differences between them than similarities

More

 

[harmonica]

I thought this thread was going to be about the 400 years The Jews were Slaves in Egypt.

...well--the Jews have an industrious, thriving, etc country--even with the Arabs trying very long to destroy Israel
..and they built it/defended it in a very short time

 

[Cecilie1200]

Let's stop the fake news.

Debunking a Myth: The Irish Were Not Slaves, Too

It has shown up on Irish trivia Facebook pages, in Scientific American magazine, and on white nationalist message boards: the little-known story of the Irish slaves who built America, who are sometimes said to have outnumbered and been treated worse than slaves from Africa.

But it’s not true.

Historians say the idea of Irish slaves is based on a misreading of history and that the distortion is often politically motivated. Far-right memes have taken off online and are used as racist barbs against African-Americans. “The Irish were slaves, too,” the memes often say. “We got over it, so why can’t you?”

A small group of Irish and American scholars has spent years pushing back on the false history. In 2016, 82 Irish scholars and writers signed an open letter denouncing the Irish slave myth and asking publications to stop mentioning it. Some complied, removing or revising articles that referenced the false claims, but the letter’s impact was limited.

Fact vs. Fiction
The Irish slave narrative is based on the misinterpretation of the history of indentured servitude, which is how many poor Europeans migrated to North America and the Caribbean in the early colonial period, historians said.

Without a doubt, life was bad for indentured servants. They were often treated brutally. Not all of them entered servitude willingly. Some were political prisoners. Some were children.

“I’m not saying it was pleasant or anything — it was the opposite — but it was a completely different category from slavery,” said Liam Hogan, a research librarian in Ireland who has spearheaded the debunking effort. “It was a transitory state.”

The legal differences between indentured servitude and chattel slavery were profound, according to Matthew Reilly, an archaeologist who studies Barbados. Unlike slaves, servants were considered legally human. Their servitude was based on a contract that limited their service to a finite period of time, usually about seven years, in exchange for passage to the colonies. They did not pass their unfree status on to descendants.

Contemporary accounts in Ireland sometimes referred to these people as slaves, Mr. Hogan said. That was true in the sense that any form of coerced labor can be described as slavery, from Ancient Rome to modern-day human trafficking. But in colonial America and the Caribbean, the word “slavery” had a specific legal meaning. Europeans, by definition, were not included in it.

“An indenture implies two people have entered into a contract with each other but slavery is not a contract,” said Leslie Harris, a professor of African-American history at Northwestern University. “It is often about being a prisoner of war or being bought or sold bodily as part of a trade. That is a critical distinction.”
.
Debunking a Myth: The Irish Were Not Slaves, Too

I agree. We should stop with the fake news. You can start by not posting this biased, unhistorical bullshit.

"Not all of them entered servitude willingly." Last time I checked, that's the definition of slavery. Particularly when you're talking about children, even if you do it in a casual, dismissive tone.

"I'm not saying it was pleasant or anything, but it was a completely different category from slavery." Yeah, as in it undercuts your claim to victimhood.

"It was a transitory state." In the sense that eventually they "transitioned" to being dead, I guess that's true.

"The legal differences between indentured servitude and chattel slavery were profound." Yeah, and they didn't apply to the people we're actually talking about, which is sort of the point.

"Unlike slaves, servants were considered legally human." And you can't say that's true about someone who could be killed at will by his master, with no legal penalties attaching, which was the case with the people we're talking about.

"Their servitude was based on a contract that limited their service to a finite period of time in exchange for passage to the colonies." Which ALSO did not apply to the people we're talking about. How does one "enter into a contract" when one is chained at gunpoint, herded unwillingly onto a ship, and then sold on an auction block to the highest bidder, as was the case with the ACTUAL PEOPLE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT?

"They did not pass their unfree status on to descendants." Indentured servants didn't, but the PEOPLE WE'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT did, particularly when they were forcibly bred against their will precisely for the purpose of creating those children.

"Contemporary accounts in Ireland sometimes referred to these people as slaves." Probably because they weren't deliberately trying to conflate two groups of people in order to serve an agenda.

"That was true in the sense that any form of coerced labor can be described as slavery, from Ancient Rome to modern-day human trafficking." Both of which ARE slavery, but I'll bet Mr. Hogan would try to brush THOSE off, too.

"But in colonial America and the Caribbean, the word “slavery” had a specific legal meaning. Europeans, by definition, were not included in it." Yeah, by HOGAN'S definition, I'm sure they weren't.

“An indenture implies two people have entered into a contract with each other but slavery is not a contract. It is often about being a prisoner of war or being bought or sold bodily as part of a trade. That is a critical distinction.” Yeah, and by coincidence, that's exactly the distinction WE are making between two different groups of Irish people.

 

[BlindBoo]

but lived with Christian Values of peace and brotherhood

Like Europe did? Wow. Now that is a distorted view of history. Republicans' goal of dumbing down their base worked like a charm.

 

[Pilot1]

Christian values?
Like the Inquisition?

That was the Catholic Church. They weren't Christians.