You're going to have to explain that. Third wave? Who was in the first two? And if you think racism was not a factor in the enslavement of black Africans you are incredibly naive.
Why Can't Racism Die Out?
- Thread starter davesmom
- Start date
You're going to have to explain that. Third wave? Who was in the first two? And if you think racism was not a factor in the enslavement of black Africans you are incredibly naive.
One of the less well known aspects of the history of slavery is how many and how often non-whites owned and traded slaves in early America. Free black slave holders could be found at one time or another “in each of the thirteen original states and later in every state that countenanced slavery,” historian R. Halliburton Jr. observed.
That black people bought and sold other black people raises “vexing questions” for 21st-century Americans like African-American writer Henry Louis Gates Jr., who writes that it betrays class divisions that have always existed within the black community.
For others, it’s an excuse to deflect the shared blame for the institution of slavery in America away from white people.
The first legal slave owner in American history was a black tobacco farmer named Anthony Johnson.
Possibly true. The wording of the statement is important. Anthony Johnson was not the first slave owner in American history, but he was, according to historians, among the first to have his lifetime ownership of a servant legally sanctioned by a court.
North Carolina’s largest slave holder in 1860 was a black plantation owner named William Ellison.
False. William Ellison was a very wealthy black plantation owner and cotton gin manufacturer who lived in South Carolina (not North Carolina). According to the 1860 census (in which his surname was listed as “Ellerson”), he owned 63 black slaves, making him the largest of the 171 black slaveholders in South Carolina, but far from the largest overall slave holder in the state.
American Indians owned thousands of black slaves.
True. Historian Tiya Miles provided this snapshot of the Native American ownership of black slaves at the turn of the 19th century for Slate magazine in January 2016:
Miles places the number of enslaved people held by Cherokees at around 600 at the start of the 19th century and around 1,500 at the time of westward removal in 1838-9. (Creeks, Choctaws, and Chickasaws, she said, held around 3,500 slaves, across the three nations, as the 19th century began.)
In 1830 there were 3,775 free black people who owned 12,740 black slaves.
Approximately true, according to historian R. Halliburton Jr.:
There were approximately 319,599 free blacks in the United States in 1830. Approximately 13.7 per cent of the total black population was free. A significant number of these free blacks were the owners of slaves. The census of 1830 lists 3,775 free Negroes who owned a total of 12,760 slaves.
Brutal black-on-black slavery was common in Africa for thousands of years.
True, in the sense that the phenomenon of human beings enslaving other human beings goes back thousands of years, but not just among blacks, and not just in Africa.
9 Facts About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know
(snopes)
But here is what is really sad:
The movement was a coalition made up of prominent white and black New Orleanians that called for integrated schools, public places and transportation and voting rights for black men, two years before Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1875 and nearly a century before the enactment of major civil rights legislation in the 20th century. Beauregard was the group's chairman.
Pierre Gustave Toutant-Beauregard, a native of St. Bernard Parish who grew up in New Orleans, instantly became a hero to white people across the South on April 12, 1861, when troops under his command opened fire on Fort Sumter, S.C. He cemented his legend when he led Confederate soldiers to a decisive victory in the first major battle of the Civil War -- the First Battle of Bull Run, also known as the First Battle of Manassas.
A bronze statue depicting the uniformed general astride his horse was erected at the Esplanade Avenue entrance to City Park in 1915. It is one of four monuments targeted for removal by Mayor Mitch Landrieu, amid a national debate about symbols that lionize men who fought to preserve slavery.
A Confederate general's forgotten cause, Beauregard and unification: Our Times | NOLA.com
Yeah, and the tards torn down his statue because of "slavery"?
When the war started Beauregard was running west point and was asked to fight for the north.
He chose to fight for his home state.
This whole slavery thing is just as messed up as global warming becoming climate change while in REALITY we go into global cooling .
"The Proclamation of 1625 by James II made it official policy that all Irish political prisoners be transported to the West Indies and sold to English planters. Soon Irish slaves were the majority of slaves in the English colonies.
In 1629 a large group of Irish men and women were sent to Guiana, and by 1632, Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat in the West Indies. By 1637 a census showed that 69% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves, which records show was a cause of concern to the English planters.
But there were not enough political prisoners to supply the demand, so every petty infraction carried a sentence of transporting, and slaver gangs combed the country sides to kidnap enough people to fill out their quotas."
The Irish Slave Trade
Please explain the thousands of years of black on black slavery mentioned above.
and please explain the Irish slavery...Brits are white too.
That black people bought and sold other black people raises “vexing questions” for 21st-century Americans like African-American writer Henry Louis Gates Jr., who writes that it betrays class divisions that have always existed within the black community.
For others, it’s an excuse to deflect the shared blame for the institution of slavery in America away from white people.
The first legal slave owner in American history was a black tobacco farmer named Anthony Johnson.
Possibly true. The wording of the statement is important. Anthony Johnson was not the first slave owner in American history, but he was, according to historians, among the first to have his lifetime ownership of a servant legally sanctioned by a court.
North Carolina’s largest slave holder in 1860 was a black plantation owner named William Ellison.
False. William Ellison was a very wealthy black plantation owner and cotton gin manufacturer who lived in South Carolina (not North Carolina). According to the 1860 census (in which his surname was listed as “Ellerson”), he owned 63 black slaves, making him the largest of the 171 black slaveholders in South Carolina, but far from the largest overall slave holder in the state.
American Indians owned thousands of black slaves.
True. Historian Tiya Miles provided this snapshot of the Native American ownership of black slaves at the turn of the 19th century for Slate magazine in January 2016:
Miles places the number of enslaved people held by Cherokees at around 600 at the start of the 19th century and around 1,500 at the time of westward removal in 1838-9. (Creeks, Choctaws, and Chickasaws, she said, held around 3,500 slaves, across the three nations, as the 19th century began.)
In 1830 there were 3,775 free black people who owned 12,740 black slaves.
Approximately true, according to historian R. Halliburton Jr.:
There were approximately 319,599 free blacks in the United States in 1830. Approximately 13.7 per cent of the total black population was free. A significant number of these free blacks were the owners of slaves. The census of 1830 lists 3,775 free Negroes who owned a total of 12,760 slaves.
Brutal black-on-black slavery was common in Africa for thousands of years.
True, in the sense that the phenomenon of human beings enslaving other human beings goes back thousands of years, but not just among blacks, and not just in Africa.
9 Facts About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know
(snopes)
But here is what is really sad:
The movement was a coalition made up of prominent white and black New Orleanians that called for integrated schools, public places and transportation and voting rights for black men, two years before Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1875 and nearly a century before the enactment of major civil rights legislation in the 20th century. Beauregard was the group's chairman.
Pierre Gustave Toutant-Beauregard, a native of St. Bernard Parish who grew up in New Orleans, instantly became a hero to white people across the South on April 12, 1861, when troops under his command opened fire on Fort Sumter, S.C. He cemented his legend when he led Confederate soldiers to a decisive victory in the first major battle of the Civil War -- the First Battle of Bull Run, also known as the First Battle of Manassas.
A bronze statue depicting the uniformed general astride his horse was erected at the Esplanade Avenue entrance to City Park in 1915. It is one of four monuments targeted for removal by Mayor Mitch Landrieu, amid a national debate about symbols that lionize men who fought to preserve slavery.
A Confederate general's forgotten cause, Beauregard and unification: Our Times | NOLA.com
Yeah, and the tards torn down his statue because of "slavery"?
When the war started Beauregard was running west point and was asked to fight for the north.
He chose to fight for his home state.
This whole slavery thing is just as messed up as global warming becoming climate change while in REALITY we go into global cooling .
"The Proclamation of 1625 by James II made it official policy that all Irish political prisoners be transported to the West Indies and sold to English planters. Soon Irish slaves were the majority of slaves in the English colonies.
In 1629 a large group of Irish men and women were sent to Guiana, and by 1632, Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat in the West Indies. By 1637 a census showed that 69% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves, which records show was a cause of concern to the English planters.
But there were not enough political prisoners to supply the demand, so every petty infraction carried a sentence of transporting, and slaver gangs combed the country sides to kidnap enough people to fill out their quotas."
The Irish Slave Trade
Please explain the thousands of years of black on black slavery mentioned above.
and please explain the Irish slavery...Brits are white too.
Given the ability to dominate. Any race would likely enslave a other. Not having that ability, doesn't prove other races behave differently.
The masses do not understand the protocols of power governing them, then or now, And one shouldn't get the actual set confused with the usual set of well published ethnic centered protocols. The former can be reversed engineered from available living history the later are a sketch in comparison. The educated will experiance difficulty understanding either. It is not possible to buy an education.
I believe the Georgia crop was wiped out by frost this year.
Red first (blood) gold second silver third and green of course the colour of FOOD.
Looking for a good time, sailor?
I believe the Georgia crop was wiped out by frost this year.
Red first (blood) gold second silver third and green of course the colour of FOOD.
The Irish Slave Trade
Please explain the thousands of years of black on black slavery mentioned above.
and please explain the Irish slavery...Brits are white too.
Brits aren't Irish, and while Brits are white, the Irish.........
Oh and don't forget the Arab slavers, who were very busy in Africa long before whitey showed up.
Bar Sinister strike me as the kind of guy who thinks whitey was busy running around the African jungles,
collecting blacks like picking fruit.
The idea that the slaves were POWs being sold by other black tribes just doesn't enter into it.
Third wave; Indians first, white people, mostly but not all of them Irish, and then the blacks.
BTW, there are more slaves now than at any time in history, but very few in the Western countries.
i wonder where they are these days..
Brits aren't Irish, and while Brits are white, the Irish.........
Oh and don't forget the Arab slavers, who were very busy in Africa long before whitey showed up.
Bar Sinister strike me as the kind of guy who thinks whitey was busy running around the African jungles,
collecting blacks like picking fruit.
The idea that the slaves were POWs being sold by other black tribes just doesn't enter into it.
Third wave; Indians first, white people, mostly but not all of them Irish, and then the blacks.
BTW, there are more slaves now than at any time in history, but very few in the Western countries.
i wonder where they are these days..
You are forgetting the most popular insturment of slavery ever invented, the Mortgage/Mortage/Death.
There are a great many slaves in Western countries, but they are so into it that most don't know anything else in fact they think they are free even so entrenched that they cannot see the fences or the chains. Slavery is in fact the preferred western political system of administration of western colonial holdings,holdings.
Last edited:
Our democracy keeps us enslaved to the international money. If our votes counted the right would be stamped out. Only the rich count.
Here is a stupid question: Is debt bad by default? And here is a stupid LIE-beral answer-along with some comments of my own in brackets):
The answer is no."The demonization of deficits and debt - and the scaremongering that goes with it - may be a hangover of the wrenching fiscal actions taken by Ottawa in the mid-1990s to get under control a debt burden that ballooned through the 1970s and 1980s.
(The REALLY FUNNY thing about the above statement is that the “wrenching fiscal actions” were taken BY LIE-berals under prime minister Jean Chretien! Even LIE-berals recognize the demon debt-when they must! As part of that harsh action, Chretien REDUCED federal transfer payments to Ontari-owe from 57 percent of health care costs down to 17 percent and thumbed his nose at Mike Harris-the Ontari-owe premier with the HIGHEST mandate ever offered an Ontari-owe premier when he ran for a second term in office! Its just too bad that RED Tories sabotaged the party and our future by forcing Harris out and replacing him with imbecile Ernie Eaves!)
(Or perhaps the stupid questioner is referring to the “wrenching fiscal action” taken by LIE-berals in British Columbia soon after Ernie Eaves replaced Harris-the wrenching action in which B.C. LIE-berals tore up and unilaterally re- wrote civil service contracts with reduced benefits for Hogs!)
It may also be related to the recent deficit crisis in the Eurozone and the tough decisions those countries are making to address the problem. Or it may simply be part of the Conservatives' narrative in support of 'small government'.
(Small govt is does not automatically lead to “wrenching fiscal action” and to a substantial degree, small govt IS beneficial! Currently we have civil service Working family Hogs dominating our electoral scene and engaging in a GROSS conflict of interest by SELLING their votes to keep compulsively spending-tax happy LIE-berals in power. Smaller govt means an end to unionized Hog labour acting as the grossly greedy tail wagging the Cdn dog. There is ample reason to suspect that Cdns have had enough of this costly Hog gravy train garbage and are getting ready to act-just as Britain staged its Brexit and Yankees supported Trump-there is good reason for Hogs to fear the silent Cdn majority going into the next election!)
(Small govt does NOT mean no govt and it certainly does not mean destruction of our health care system-nor reduction of any other govt service. Small govt simply means BETTER CONTROL of govt spending. Veterans Affairs Dept provides the same service as before even though some union Hogs in smaller and lightly used branch offices were fired and some other Hogs replaced by non union people. There will still be the same number of support staff in hospitals even if union control is reduced. All we are talking about here is preventing our services from being HEAVILY milked as cash cows by Hogs! We are NOT discussing reduction of any services! Less gravy for Hogs means MORE money FOR services! Do we get better service from one highly paid and arrogant Hog-convinced of his own importance? Or do we get better service from TWO decently paid workers who want to keep their jobs and don’t have dictatorial union goons to hide behind? The Hog devil is in the details!)
Unfortunately, this deficit-phobia is built on a fundamental misunderstanding of how sound fiscal management really works. To most Canadians, getting rid of deficits is the only thing that matters: If a government has a deficit, it must be an imprudent fiscal manager. But this is a myth and it's undermining our ability to make good policy - for ourselves and for future generations. Without debt, both public and private, economies simply could not function.
In other words, the complete elimination of the deficit was never an economic necessity - even if it is a (retarded) political necessity."
(Oh-if elimination of the deficit is not important then how about we TEST that theory and simply write off the 55 billion dollar DEBT that LIE-berals have promised to OSSTF-the Ontari-owe high school teachers? How about we see how teachers feel about deficits when their pension DISAPPEARS? THAT is set to happen some time around 2018 unless massive new money is BORROWED and made available to Hog pension managers! Since paying off deficits is not important we can safely ignore the Hog deficits in their pension plans-right!?
Time to get over your deficit phobia, Canada
(The imbecile who wrote this garbage about alleged deficit phobia CLEARLY collects a GENEROUS helping of that borrowed money and is clearly terrified that the flow of gravy is being shut off! If the situation were otherwise, that propaganda meister would be singing a DIFFERENT TUNE! The only people who support deficit financing are the people being PAID to like it! The rest of us know that deficits are bad -from looking at the evidence in our pay packets and tax bills and from reading the newspapers and watching the “PIGS” led by Greece-drown in red ink!)
One of the less well known aspects of the history of slavery is how many and how often non-whites owned and traded slaves in early America. Free black slave holders could be found at one time or another “in each of the thirteen original states and later in every state that countenanced slavery,” historian R. Halliburton Jr. observed.
That black people bought and sold other black people raises “vexing questions” for 21st-century Americans like African-American writer Henry Louis Gates Jr., who writes that it betrays class divisions that have always existed within the black community.
For others, it’s an excuse to deflect the shared blame for the institution of slavery in America away from white people.
The first legal slave owner in American history was a black tobacco farmer named Anthony Johnson.
Possibly true. The wording of the statement is important. Anthony Johnson was not the first slave owner in American history, but he was, according to historians, among the first to have his lifetime ownership of a servant legally sanctioned by a court.
North Carolina’s largest slave holder in 1860 was a black plantation owner named William Ellison.
False. William Ellison was a very wealthy black plantation owner and cotton gin manufacturer who lived in South Carolina (not North Carolina). According to the 1860 census (in which his surname was listed as “Ellerson”), he owned 63 black slaves, making him the largest of the 171 black slaveholders in South Carolina, but far from the largest overall slave holder in the state.
American Indians owned thousands of black slaves.
True. Historian Tiya Miles provided this snapshot of the Native American ownership of black slaves at the turn of the 19th century for Slate magazine in January 2016:
Miles places the number of enslaved people held by Cherokees at around 600 at the start of the 19th century and around 1,500 at the time of westward removal in 1838-9. (Creeks, Choctaws, and Chickasaws, she said, held around 3,500 slaves, across the three nations, as the 19th century began.)
In 1830 there were 3,775 free black people who owned 12,740 black slaves.
Approximately true, according to historian R. Halliburton Jr.:
There were approximately 319,599 free blacks in the United States in 1830. Approximately 13.7 per cent of the total black population was free. A significant number of these free blacks were the owners of slaves. The census of 1830 lists 3,775 free Negroes who owned a total of 12,760 slaves.
Brutal black-on-black slavery was common in Africa for thousands of years.
True, in the sense that the phenomenon of human beings enslaving other human beings goes back thousands of years, but not just among blacks, and not just in Africa.
9 Facts About Slavery They Don't Want You to Know
(snopes)
But here is what is really sad:
The movement was a coalition made up of prominent white and black New Orleanians that called for integrated schools, public places and transportation and voting rights for black men, two years before Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1875 and nearly a century before the enactment of major civil rights legislation in the 20th century. Beauregard was the group's chairman.
Pierre Gustave Toutant-Beauregard, a native of St. Bernard Parish who grew up in New Orleans, instantly became a hero to white people across the South on April 12, 1861, when troops under his command opened fire on Fort Sumter, S.C. He cemented his legend when he led Confederate soldiers to a decisive victory in the first major battle of the Civil War -- the First Battle of Bull Run, also known as the First Battle of Manassas.
A bronze statue depicting the uniformed general astride his horse was erected at the Esplanade Avenue entrance to City Park in 1915. It is one of four monuments targeted for removal by Mayor Mitch Landrieu, amid a national debate about symbols that lionize men who fought to preserve slavery.
A Confederate general's forgotten cause, Beauregard and unification: Our Times | NOLA.com
Yeah, and the tards torn down his statue because of "slavery"?
When the war started Beauregard was running west point and was asked to fight for the north.
He chose to fight for his home state.
This whole slavery thing is just as messed up as global warming becoming climate change while in REALITY we go into global cooling .
"The Proclamation of 1625 by James II made it official policy that all Irish political prisoners be transported to the West Indies and sold to English planters. Soon Irish slaves were the majority of slaves in the English colonies.
In 1629 a large group of Irish men and women were sent to Guiana, and by 1632, Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat in the West Indies. By 1637 a census showed that 69% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves, which records show was a cause of concern to the English planters.
But there were not enough political prisoners to supply the demand, so every petty infraction carried a sentence of transporting, and slaver gangs combed the country sides to kidnap enough people to fill out their quotas."
The Irish Slave Trade
Please explain the thousands of years of black on black slavery mentioned above.
and please explain the Irish slavery...Brits are white too.
I don't see any thousands of years of Black on Black slavery in the Americas. In fact it is not possible as there were no Europeans in
the Americas prior to 1500. Also using your own numbers the number of slaves owned by Blacks would have only been a tiny fraction of the total of number of slaves in the US. You state 12,740 slaves owned by Black Americans. However, there was a total of about four million Black slaves in the US. That means only one slave in every 300 was owned by another Black.
As for your comment on the Irish, it is irrelevant as Jintonix's post made no reference to how Europeans treated other Europeans. If you wish I am quite happy to enlighten you on the history of slavery in Europe, Asia, Africa, and anywhere else you like.
Hey there- you could go read The Book of Negroes and find out what happened to a bunch of freed slaves after the Yankee revolution.
Brits offered freedom to any slave that would run away from master and do some work for the British army. Later brits set up a colony in Sierra Leone and moved a bunch of ex-slaves there- after all its taking them back to Sfrica where they came from right?
And of course it was a mess- no common language with other local blacks, no common culture etc- but what made it REALLY HARD was that the local black population treated the former slaves as poorly armed white people to be killed as quickly as possible! No sympathy there!
And of course we could talk of Liberia- that crazy experiment set up by Yankee president Monroe- in which a bunch of slaves volunteered to be shipped back to Africa- they figured getting set up on land they would own in a country they had never seen but only heard of sounded better than being slaves so off they went-taking with them all the skills they had learned while living with whites- you know- making gunpowder and cannon, building sailing ships so they could export the tobacco and cotton they were growing using LOCAL slave labour etc!
And what about the Arabs? They STARTED the African slave trade- hauling blacks to be sold in Asia! |You really cannot blame the Europeans for taking over the trade just because their ships were bigger and faster and better suited to the cold Atlantic!
And what of Greece? The ancient birth place of democracy? The place largely BUILT by slaves?
And what of conditions in Kuwait -after the Desert Storm- does anybody remember the plaintiff cries of Palestinian slaves complaining about how they were treated by other Arabs? And asking why the world would not stop the abuses that are occurring to this very day?
Those who condemn whites as devils are ignoring their own past!
Rebels exist in every race. A German resistance movement existed even in Nazi Germany.
I find your post rather mystifying as it does not refute anything I said, mainly because it is completely off-topic. What has the Book of Negroes got to do with the topic and how does it refute the fact that less than one slave in 300 was owned by a Black?
Also if you bother to read my post more carefully it would reveal that I am very well aware of non-Black slavery. You mention ancient Greece without seeming to realize that slavery predates Greece by thousands of years. Read up on the civilizations of Mesopotamia.
Sorry- you are blathering and ignoring obvious points that you find inconvenient! One point: that black people treated other black people just as badly as any white people.
Another point: ALL societies from ALL races once relied on slavery. BUT ONLY the British Empire voted slavery out of existence and then went on to send warships to patrol and protect the African coast.
Native Americans are on record as keeping black slaves when they could steal them.
Aztecs and others practiced both slavery and human sacrifice.
Pacific islanders and Africans practiced cannibalism.
The trade in black slaves was facilitated by African chiefs selling off `surplus` population and getting rid of political enemies.
At the height of South African White Rule, thousands of Africans sneaked into South Africa because they could make TWENTY TIMES MORE MONEY in White ruled South Africa than they could in black ruled despot dominated hell holes.
White ruled Rhodesia EXPORTED FOOD Surplus- black ruled Zimbabwe cries for food aid from the white west.
Whites are not saints but their way is PROVEN more attractive. NOBODY sneaks into African from Europe, but there is an avalanche of people going the other way! Your arguments about white racists are PROVEN wrong as a horde of people vote with their feet- frantic to find a way to live among the whites!