Black slavery

[ManyBeers]

[


You would make something like that up to try and get a point across. The point you made was good enough, you did not need to overexagerate it with something no one would belive.
[/quote]

I'm not that smart. I don't cheat.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: sonz70

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: yepmetoo

Originally posted by: Rebasxer

Originally posted by: yepmetoo

Originally posted by: Rebasxer
Well first off, indentured servatude was a contract both parties entered willingly to, but most indentured servants never became free of their masters, and almost all were abused. Indians were enslaved but they didn't work too well, too much pride ect. And most black slaves were given up by African chiefs. These chiefs would round up people and give them to European slave traders in return for money/european conviences and favor. It was not really so much "evil european uses technology to force free loving africans to become slaves" but rather "european slave traders bargined with African upper class for slaves"

No.

I love people who disagree without any proof

I'm not here to teach you history but you can start here:
http://www.innercity.org/holt/slavechron.html

then move on to googling what was actually involved in slave trade...........

Yuor missing the point. Why did they not refuse."Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death". Do those words mean nothing to you.

Different mindset of people back than, the same as people in med-evil times allowed to be lil more than pawns in whatever the nobles wanted. They became slaves, because they were told to.

Some people do what there told. Some don't

 

[sonz70]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: sonz70

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: yepmetoo

Originally posted by: Rebasxer

Originally posted by: yepmetoo

Originally posted by: Rebasxer
Well first off, indentured servatude was a contract both parties entered willingly to, but most indentured servants never became free of their masters, and almost all were abused. Indians were enslaved but they didn't work too well, too much pride ect. And most black slaves were given up by African chiefs. These chiefs would round up people and give them to European slave traders in return for money/european conviences and favor. It was not really so much "evil european uses technology to force free loving africans to become slaves" but rather "european slave traders bargined with African upper class for slaves"

No.

I love people who disagree without any proof

I'm not here to teach you history but you can start here:
http://www.innercity.org/holt/slavechron.html

then move on to googling what was actually involved in slave trade...........

Yuor missing the point. Why did they not refuse."Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death". Do those words mean nothing to you.

Different mindset of people back than, the same as people in med-evil times allowed to be lil more than pawns in whatever the nobles wanted. They became slaves, because they were told to.

Some people do what there told. Some don't

Well a majoirty of people chose to do what they were told.

 

[0roo0roo]

oh goodie the african slavery was better apologists have entered. my slavery is better then yours lol

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: NeuroSynapsis
uh europeans were enslaved too. it's called indentured servitude (i think). you work for x amount of years of your life for a trip to america and then you become free. don't they teach you people this sht in school?

No, they dont teach that anymore. Africans were the only people ever enslaved and slavery does not exist today is all they teach. All people from the south also owned slaves.

 

[ManyBeers]

O

I would give you death.....does life mean nothing to you? FYI many did refuse......

You call slavery "life". Then what is all the bitching about. They chose life"slavery". What's your definition of life?

 

[EyeMNathan]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: EyeMNathan

QFT.

Apparently some people like to lump themselves in with the slaveholding moral garbage of the 19th century. My ancestors during the time of slavery in the US were living in Germany, so 'we' certainly isn't me or my family.

Yet they came here?

Yes. Your point?

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: FleshLight

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: FleshLight

Originally posted by: yepmetoo

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: blinky8225
I thought we did try indians, but they died too easily from disease. Blacks were tougher and hardier, supposedly.

slavery in the caribean (feck my spelling sucks today) was a failure with the natives. Blacks were the natural choices, as there was already a history with black slaves in the mediterreanan.

Why were they slaves?. Why didn't they refuse?

How would they refuse?

He's just trolling now.

Don't call me a troll. Either give useful input to the question posed, or STFU dude.

Alright kid, back then, the Africans had no idea where they were going or what they would be subjected to in the "new world". It was be a slave or die, and since they didn't know that living would be an arguably worser (too lazy to find a proper word) fate than death, they chose life. You see, Africans, like all humans, have this thing called survival instinct.

There are fates worse then death. And to here the blacks tell the world how horrible slavery was I am surprised so many chose life. I think we have a pain avoidance instinct far more than a "survival instinct". I am not a kid.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: EyeMNathan

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: EyeMNathan

QFT.

Apparently some people like to lump themselves in with the slaveholding moral garbage of the 19th century. My ancestors during the time of slavery in the US were living in Germany, so 'we' certainly isn't me or my family.

Yet they came here?

Yes. Your point?

point is why did they come here then if you are saying it's not a 'we' situation now?

Fact is love it or leave it, countries have history.

Esp. as a recent inductee, don't crap on it.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: sonz70
Well a majoirty of people chose to do what they were told.

like stop posting and give me my lap dance?

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: FleshLight

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: blinky8225
I thought we did try indians, but they died too easily from disease. Blacks were tougher and hardier, supposedly.

Whose We?

We as in America and Americans, the country that a majority of the posters here live in.[

Well my ancestors didn't get here until the early part of the 20th century and had nothing to do with slavery. Speak for yourself.

 

[EyeMNathan]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: EyeMNathan

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: EyeMNathan

QFT.

Apparently some people like to lump themselves in with the slaveholding moral garbage of the 19th century. My ancestors during the time of slavery in the US were living in Germany, so 'we' certainly isn't me or my family.

Yet they came here?

Yes. Your point?

point is why did they come here then if you are saying it's not a 'we' situation now?

Fact is love it or leave it, countries have history.

Esp. as a recent inductee, don't crap on it.

The history of this country has enough crap on it as it is. And people who come here after-the-fact don't inherit the countries history. We all have our own origins and ancestry, thats whats great about living in a country comprised almost entirely of immigrants and children, grandchildren, or great grandchildren of immigrants.

And I will not be held responsible for, or pay a dime for, the transgressions of some racist pigs from the 19th century.

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: Rebasxer

Originally posted by: yepmetoo

Originally posted by: Rebasxer

Originally posted by: yepmetoo

Originally posted by: Rebasxer

Originally posted by: yepmetoo

Originally posted by: Rebasxer
Well first off, indentured servatude was a contract both parties entered willingly to, but most indentured servants never became free of their masters, and almost all were abused. Indians were enslaved but they didn't work too well, too much pride ect. And most black slaves were given up by African chiefs. These chiefs would round up people and give them to European slave traders in return for money/european conviences and favor. It was not really so much "evil european uses technology to force free loving africans to become slaves" but rather "european slave traders bargined with African upper class for slaves"

No.

I love people who disagree without any proof

I'm not here to teach you history but you can start here:
http://www.innercity.org/holt/slavechron.html

then move on to googling what was actually involved in slave trade...........

Text

Go to the Library and read chapter 2 of that book, I'll trust a real historian over some community activist named eddie becker.

Oh, and most of the sources that guy cites don't lead anywhere...

You are free too look up the sources. Bad links are not that uncommon......

Howard Zinn is a historian?

He has a Ph.D. in History from Columbia and taught at serveral colleges. That probably makes him a historian

That has nothing to do with refusing to be a slave, no mater what.

 

[FleshLight]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: FleshLight

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: blinky8225
I thought we did try indians, but they died too easily from disease. Blacks were tougher and hardier, supposedly.

Whose We?

We as in America and Americans, the country that a majority of the posters here live in.[

Well my ancestors didn't get here until the early part of the 20th century and had nothing to do with slavery. Speak for yourself.

We is used to denote America and Americans. You say "We dropped the abomb on the japanese" as opposed to "The crew of Enola Gay dropped the abomb on the japanese". English and History are your friend .

 

[ManyBeers]

Originally posted by: sonz70

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: sonz70

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: yepmetoo

Originally posted by: Rebasxer

Originally posted by: yepmetoo

Originally posted by: Rebasxer
Well first off, indentured servatude was a contract both parties entered willingly to, but most indentured servants never became free of their masters, and almost all were abused. Indians were enslaved but they didn't work too well, too much pride ect. And most black slaves were given up by African chiefs. These chiefs would round up people and give them to European slave traders in return for money/european conviences and favor. It was not really so much "evil european uses technology to force free loving africans to become slaves" but rather "european slave traders bargined with African upper class for slaves"

No.

I love people who disagree without any proof

I'm not here to teach you history but you can start here:
http://www.innercity.org/holt/slavechron.html

then move on to googling what was actually involved in slave trade...........

Yuor missing the point. Why did they not refuse."Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death". Do those words mean nothing to you.

Different mindset of people back than, the same as people in med-evil times allowed to be lil more than pawns in whatever the nobles wanted. They became slaves, because they were told to.

Some people do what there told. Some don't

Well a majoirty of people chose to do what they were told.

The majority of people are not slaves. So I beg to differ with you.

 

[EyeMNathan]

Originally posted by: FleshLight

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: FleshLight

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: blinky8225
I thought we did try indians, but they died too easily from disease. Blacks were tougher and hardier, supposedly.

Whose We?

We as in America and Americans, the country that a majority of the posters here live in.[

Well my ancestors didn't get here until the early part of the 20th century and had nothing to do with slavery. Speak for yourself.

We is used to denote America and Americans. You say "We dropped the abomb on the japanese" as opposed to "The crew of Enola Gay dropped the abomb on the japanese". English and History are your friend .

"We" is actually not the correct way to write about an event such as that. That is why history books made in the US for US students do not have "We" when they are talking about Americans.

Inappropriate use of "you" and "we" to refer to generic people is very common, but technically incorrect.

When you say "we" did something, that is an aggressive an inappropriate way to write. It's much like having "you", because you are forcibly including your reader or audience into the writing by using an inappropriate pronoun.

 

[ManyBeers]

O

We is used to denote America and Americans. You say "We dropped the abomb on the japanese" as opposed to "The crew of Enola Gay dropped the abomb on the japanese". English and History are your friend .

No we is used as a scapegoat when there is no individuals readyily available to blame. A catchall so to speak.

 

[FleshLight]

Originally posted by: EyeMNathan

Originally posted by: FleshLight

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: FleshLight

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: blinky8225
I thought we did try indians, but they died too easily from disease. Blacks were tougher and hardier, supposedly.

Whose We?

We as in America and Americans, the country that a majority of the posters here live in.[

Well my ancestors didn't get here until the early part of the 20th century and had nothing to do with slavery. Speak for yourself.

We is used to denote America and Americans. You say "We dropped the abomb on the japanese" as opposed to "The crew of Enola Gay dropped the abomb on the japanese". English and History are your friend .

"We" is actually not the correct way to write about an event such as that. That is why history books made in the US for US students do not have "We" when they are talking about Americans.

Inappropriate use of "you" and "we" to refer to generic people is very common, but technically incorrect.

When you say "we" did something, that is an aggressive an inappropriate way to write. It's much like having "you", because you are forcibly including your reader or audience into the writing by using an inappropriate pronoun.

Alright gotcha. From now on I will use the more politically correct "wealthy lower colonial plantation owners".

 

[EyeMNathan]

Originally posted by: FleshLight

Originally posted by: EyeMNathan

Originally posted by: FleshLight

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: FleshLight

Originally posted by: ManyBeers

Originally posted by: blinky8225
I thought we did try indians, but they died too easily from disease. Blacks were tougher and hardier, supposedly.

Whose We?

We as in America and Americans, the country that a majority of the posters here live in.[

Well my ancestors didn't get here until the early part of the 20th century and had nothing to do with slavery. Speak for yourself.

We is used to denote America and Americans. You say "We dropped the abomb on the japanese" as opposed to "The crew of Enola Gay dropped the abomb on the japanese". English and History are your friend .

"We" is actually not the correct way to write about an event such as that. That is why history books made in the US for US students do not have "We" when they are talking about Americans.

Inappropriate use of "you" and "we" to refer to generic people is very common, but technically incorrect.

When you say "we" did something, that is an aggressive an inappropriate way to write. It's much like having "you", because you are forcibly including your reader or audience into the writing by using an inappropriate pronoun.

Alright gotcha. From now on I will use the more politically correct "wealthy lower colonial plantation owners".

I did the same thing a lot actually, but I recently started college after being out of school for several years, and I've learned a lot of new English rules. I don't use most of em online because frankly its a waste of time. But there are ones I look out for, like using "you" and "we" inappropriately.

 

[FeuerFrei]

Originally posted by: ManyBeers
I don't get it. The way I see it is...the only way you can enslave someone is if they accept that condition willingly. I guess I don't understand how only blacks were enslaved in this country and not other races ...such as the "Indians",chinese,south americans,etc. I find this very difficult to understand. Why blacks?

Because blacks were ok with it.
Other races just said "No".


Or maybe the U.S. had an exclusivity agreement with Africa. We buy only African slaves and get a discount price per slave.