The value of slavery?

[IM2]

Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.

The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.

I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs. If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.

For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either. It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs. For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves. If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.

Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not. This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.

I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in. There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy. There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure. No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.

There you go with the "fully confident" shit again. I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.

I am trying to figure out why you think I am interested in what you feel about me?. Youre just some poor white boy that cant address the topic of reparations without being afraid you will lose your welfare check.

You're a fucking idiot. I am neither poor nor do receive welfare. You are the one looking for a handout from the U.S. taxpayers.

Go peddle your racist bullshit elsewhere.

Reparations are not handouts.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

What does this even mean?

If you are illiterate that's your problem.

If I were illiterate I wouldn't have been able to read it you asshat. It just makes no sense, you have issues with cogency.

It makes plenty of sense, you are just dumb.

I can hear and speak quite well thank you, therefore I am not dumb.

Its kind of obvious your just another dumb monkey. You deny facts and precedent regarding reparations.

I am a homosapien... not a monkey... and I have already pointed out that I hear and speak.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs. If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.

For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either. It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs. For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves. If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.

Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not. This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.

I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in. There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy. There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure. No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.

There you go with the "fully confident" shit again. I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.

I am trying to figure out why you think I am interested in what you feel about me?. Youre just some poor white boy that cant address the topic of reparations without being afraid you will lose your welfare check.

You're a fucking idiot. I am neither poor nor do receive welfare. You are the one looking for a handout from the U.S. taxpayers.

Go peddle your racist bullshit elsewhere.

Reparations are not handouts.

OK, what did you do to earn a check from the U.S. taxpayers?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

What does this even mean?

If you are illiterate that's your problem.

If I were illiterate I wouldn't have been able to read it you asshat. It just makes no sense, you have issues with cogency.

It makes plenty of sense, you are just dumb.

I can hear and speak quite well thank you, therefore I am not dumb.

So we want to play semantics.

Words matter, especially with those that call other people "dumb"

 

[Indeependent]

So selling family members is OK.
Uh huh.

So, breaking up families is ok?
Uh huh.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Trespassers?

No. Slaves and Native Americans.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.

NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.

Wrong. Slave owners sold slaves to other slave owners.

NA families were murdered by the government due to the Indian Removal Act.




Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Slave owners sold slaves.
And so?

 

[Indeependent]

So selling family members is OK.
Uh huh.

So, breaking up families is ok?
Uh huh.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Trespassers?

No. Slaves and Native Americans.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.

NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.

No, blacks were only sold by their families on stormfront.

According to Stormfront, Jews and Blacks are controlling the world.
Now back to reality...

 

[IM2]

Cognitive Dissonance is specific enough for me.

The belief that other races should get reparations but not Blacks is the one that is pertinent to this topic.

I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs. If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.

For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either. It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs. For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves. If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.

Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not. This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.

I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in. There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy. There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure. No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.

There you go with the "fully confident" shit again. I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.

He is right.

Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule. Let it go. You're not entitled to anything more.

Actually that did not happen.

The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’

Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”

Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”

Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”

With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.

The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.

Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.

 

[IM2]

So, breaking up families is ok?
Uh huh.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Trespassers?

No. Slaves and Native Americans.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.

NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.

No, blacks were only sold by their families on stormfront.

According to Stormfront, Jews and Blacks are controlling the world.
Now back to reality...

And that reality says Africans didn't sell family members to the Dutch or anyone else.

 

[Indeependent]

Trespassers?

No. Slaves and Native Americans.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Slaves were sold by their families except on BlackHistoricalRevisionism.com.

NA familes were separated or exiled by psychotic Chirstian White men obsessed with Manifest Desitiny.

No, blacks were only sold by their families on stormfront.

According to Stormfront, Jews and Blacks are controlling the world.
Now back to reality...

And that reality says Africans didn't sell family members to the Dutch or anyone else.

Really?
I don’t think so.
Where do you get your bullshit from?

 

[Indeependent]

I'm fully confident that not all whites in the US hold such beliefs. If nothing else, some people don't believe in the idea of financial reparations at all.

For that matter, it is not necessarily cognitive dissonance, either. It would depend on the specifics of the beliefs. For example, it's been brought up in this thread that some people believe reparations should only go to those who directly experience a wrong; in the context of the thread, that would be those who were kept as slaves. If such a person is accepting of reparations to people of another race, so long as those reparations only include those directly affected by whatever wrong was afflicted, there would be no contradiction, therefore no dissonance.

Grouping all whites together, even all US whites, is not a positive when it comes to racial discussion, just as grouping all blacks together is not. This is especially true when one falsely ascribes a characteristic to all of the group.

I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in. There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy. There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure. No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.

There you go with the "fully confident" shit again. I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.

He is right.

Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule. Let it go. You're not entitled to anything more.

Actually that did not happen.

The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’

Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”

Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”

Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”

With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.

The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.

Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.

You do realize that some Blacks came here on their own.

 

[Asclepias]

I'm fully confident most whites in the US hold such beliefs. We know this because the fight for reparations is continually argued against as if its illogical. This is where the cognitive dissonance comes in. There are plenty of examples and precedent for it yet whites pretend the very notion is crazy. There wouldnt be any precedent or examples if there was no belief in the general concept. Matter of fact the word reparations wouldnt appear in the english language. The idea that it should go only to directly affected persons is simply an escape clause to relive the mental pressure. No where in the definition of reparations is there a time limit.

There you go with the "fully confident" shit again. I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.

He is right.

Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule. Let it go. You're not entitled to anything more.

Actually that did not happen.

The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’

Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”

Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”

Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”

With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.

The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.

Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.

You do realize that some Blacks came here on their own.

Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?

 

[Indeependent]

There you go with the "fully confident" shit again. I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.

He is right.

Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule. Let it go. You're not entitled to anything more.

Actually that did not happen.

The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’

Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”

Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”

Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”

With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.

The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.

Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.

You do realize that some Blacks came here on their own.

Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?

Duh!
No free Black person became a slave.
Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.

 

[Asclepias]

He is right.

Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule. Let it go. You're not entitled to anything more.

Actually that did not happen.

The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’

Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”

Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”

Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”

With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.

The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.

Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.

You do realize that some Blacks came here on their own.

Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?

Duh!
No free Black person became a slave.
Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.

You do realize that plenty of free Black people here in the US became enslaved right? Hell they even made a movie about it. Why do never seem to know what you are talking about?

 

[Indeependent]

Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule. Let it go. You're not entitled to anything more.

Actually that did not happen.

The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’

Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”

Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”

Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”

With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.

The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.

Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.

You do realize that some Blacks came here on their own.

Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?

Duh!
No free Black person became a slave.
Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.

You do realize that plenty of free Black people here in the US became enslaved right? Hell they even made a movie about it. Why do never seem to know what you are talking about?

I saw the movie.
The movie states it was a rare occurrence.

 

[Asclepias]

Actually that did not happen.

The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’

Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”

Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”

Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”

With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.

The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.

Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.

You do realize that some Blacks came here on their own.

Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?

Duh!
No free Black person became a slave.
Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.

You do realize that plenty of free Black people here in the US became enslaved right? Hell they even made a movie about it. Why do never seem to know what you are talking about?

I saw the movie.
The movie states it was a rare occurrence.

Even if true wouldnt that contradict your claim that "No free Black person became a slave."?

Your words not mine.

Doesnt look like it was such a rare thing after all now does it?

Africans in America/Part 3/Kidnapping in Pennsylvania

"The passage of the 1793 Fugitive Slave Act, fueled a huge and vastly profitable underground industry that took full advantage of the inferior legal status of free and enslaved blacks. The law made it possible for a white person to claim any black person as a fugitive, and placed the burden of proof on the captive. Free blacks living in Philadelphia, Cincinnati, and other cities near the borders of slave states were especially vulnerable, though several well-known cases demonstrate that no state was immune.

Slave speculators (or slavers) -- who legally purchased the rights to runaways, captured them, and then resold them at a profit -- often seized blacks at random, banking on their inability to prove their status to the satisfaction of a magistrate. In one case, a slave speculator who attempted to seize AME Bishop Richard Allen found himself in debtors' prison, charged with attempted kidnapping, false accusation and perjury by Allen, who dropped the charges several months later."

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

There you go with the "fully confident" shit again. I'm fully confident you are not the brightest bulb in the box.

He is right.

Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule. Let it go. You're not entitled to anything more.

Actually that did not happen.

The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’

Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”

Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”

Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”

With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.

The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.

Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.

You do realize that some Blacks came here on their own.

Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?

Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.

 

[Indeependent]

You do realize that some Blacks came here on their own.

Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?

Duh!
No free Black person became a slave.
Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.

You do realize that plenty of free Black people here in the US became enslaved right? Hell they even made a movie about it. Why do never seem to know what you are talking about?

I saw the movie.
The movie states it was a rare occurrence.

Even if true wouldnt that contradict your claim that "No free Black person became a slave."?

Your words not mine.

He was kipnapped so 100,000,000 Blacks who aren’t descendants of slaves should receive reparations.
Now please find a Link showing millions of Blacks were kidnapped into slavery.

 

[Indeependent]

He is right.

Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule. Let it go. You're not entitled to anything more.

Actually that did not happen.

The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’

Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”

Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”

Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”

With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.

The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.

Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.

You do realize that some Blacks came here on their own.

Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?

Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.

Shhh...facts upset the racist brain.

 

[Asclepias]

Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?

Duh!
No free Black person became a slave.
Their families on the African continent sold them and none of your out of context or out of chronological order bullshit changes history.

You do realize that plenty of free Black people here in the US became enslaved right? Hell they even made a movie about it. Why do never seem to know what you are talking about?

I saw the movie.
The movie states it was a rare occurrence.

Even if true wouldnt that contradict your claim that "No free Black person became a slave."?

Your words not mine.

He was kipnapped so 100,000,000 Blacks who aren’t descendants of slaves should receive reparations.
Now please find a Link showing millions of Blacks were kidnapped into slavery.

All I need to do is find one to show you lied about no Black people being kidnapped and sold into slavery. Well I already did that.

 

[Asclepias]

He is right.

Fuck that shit... slaves got their 40 acres and a mule. Let it go. You're not entitled to anything more.

Actually that did not happen.

The Truth Behind ’40 Acres and a Mule’

Today, we commonly use the phrase “40 acres and a mule,” but few of us have read the Order itself. Three of its parts are relevant here. Section one bears repeating in full: “The islands from Charleston, south, the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns river, Florida, are reserved and set apart for the settlement of the negroes [sic] now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.”

Section two specifies that these new communities, moreover, would be governed entirely by black people themselves: ” … on the islands, and in the settlements hereafter to be established, no white person whatever, unless military officers and soldiers detailed for duty, will be permitted to reside; and the sole and exclusive management of affairs will be left to the freed people themselves … By the laws of war, and orders of the President of the United States, the negro [sic] is free and must be dealt with as such.”

Finally, section three specifies the allocation of land: ” … each family shall have a plot of not more than (40) acres of tillable ground, and when it borders on some water channel, with not more than 800 feet water front, in the possession of which land the military authorities will afford them protection, until such time as they can protect themselves, or until Congress shall regulate their title.”

With this Order, 400,000 acres of land — “a strip of coastline stretching from Charleston, South Carolina, to the St. John’s River in Florida, including Georgia’s Sea Islands and the mainland thirty miles in from the coast,” as Barton Myers reports — would be redistributed to the newly freed slaves.

The Truth Behind '40 Acres and a Mule' | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

And what happened to this astonishingly visionary program, which would have fundamentally altered the course of American race relations? Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor and a sympathizer with the South, overturned the Order in the fall of 1865, and, as Barton Myers sadly concludes, “returned the land along the South Carolina, Georgia and Florida coasts to the planters who had originally owned it” — to the very people who had declared war on the United States of America.

Now shut up. Because if we had got what was promised we would not be talking about reparations now.

You do realize that some Blacks came here on their own.

Hell there were Blacks here before columbus. What does that have to do with reparations due to legalizing chattel slavery here in the states?

Columbus never set foot on North America you dummy. And the first Africans to come here is recorded as August 1619.

Whites record a lot of things that arent true and we know columbus himself was told by the NA that they traded with Africans long before whites showed up.