Serious question to Trump voters

[ll74]

Watch Thomas Sowells video on black ghetto culture as it relates to white redneck culture and you will understand.

I asked you wtf you meant. Answer the fucking question.

 

[butters]

Regardless of how badly or how supposedly well slaves were treated it is still a fucked up and archaic practice.

I don’t know why you think I am defending slavery.

you are defending the good ol' boy southerners, giving them some kind of 'oh, they weren't so bad, really, were they and "the blacks" did okay under their guidance' attitude most decent people find disgusting; it also speaks to your having southern roots or wishing you did. A whole lot of southerners, to this day, still believe that 'black folk' were 'looked after', given a meaningful existence, and loved their kind owners almost like family... they even got taught some skills to boot! How nice of the owners to do that for them, allowing them to use those same skills later on when slavery was abolished.

These same southerners (and i personally know some) are quite oblivious to the realities and think slavery was actual beneficial for the 'not too bright, kinda lazy, black man', blind to the fact that these were people who were relegated to mere belongings and that, left to their own devices (those born in the USA and not necessarily desiring to return to African roots) would have learned to read, to write, become educated, learn skills WITHOUT the patronage of slave owners, just the same as any white child and adult!

 

[ll74]

You will have your answer if you watch it.

So you can't answer the question and it's my fault that you can't.

Got it.

If you can't explain what you mean, then don't say anything.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

The northern plantations were much bigger.

There were 2300 plantations that had over a 100 slaves or more (read the links) . There are about, as best I can find no more than 20 of these owned by "northerns". Try again.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

It's Audrey the PlantBoi, aka BotBo, aka BoBo, aka Cornpone and mutiple other IDs.

It doesn't have a point. It doesn't need a point. It argues just to yank your chain. The more you engage it, the more it digs in, just to do so, for no other purpose to to keep you responding.

The fun is in blowing it up. You don't wish to participate, then just use the ignore feature.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

What I am saying is that from the perspective of their great great great grandparents that might have owned slaves they are not lying when they say that a lot of them treated their slaves relatively well compared to how most black people lived around the world.

So the owners, ie the people driving the Slave trade, have no responsibility on people being kidnapped in their homes, beaten, chained up, put on a ship where the survival rate from Africa to the Americas was under 50%? That the "owners" have zero responsibility for those atrocities, and we should all be glad they "treated" their "chattels" as well as Ranchers treated their cattle.

Is that what the fuck your trying to say?

 

[ll74]

Anyone who thinks we should go back to enslaving black people in America today is an idiot at best and I doubt you could find many of these people even in the South. And even if southerners treated black slaves like children who needed to be protected and never harmed them that still isn’t proper “guidance” for full grown adults.

What I am saying is that from the perspective of their great great great grandparents that might have owned slaves they are not lying when they say that a lot of them treated their slaves relatively well compared to how most black people lived around the world. Life was very hard for everyone back then but for black people in Africa life was basically hell and being on a plantation was almost a welcome alternative. If you were black and you had the choice of living in Africa or being a slave in the American South in the 1600s there is no question what you would pick, and that is not because being a slave in America was great by any stretch of the imagination.

The problem is that we have a modern perspective on how we look at slavery in America and we compare how rich white slaveowners lived to their slaves when the average black person lived a much worse life and the slaves were almost at the top of the food chain for people of African descent at that time.

100% slave owners treated their slaves like slaves. Shit doesn't smell like anything but shit...no matter how you describe it

 

[Fuzzy1975]

The people that were doing the kidnapping and starting the process of enslavement weren’t even white, the slaveowners weren’t driving the slave trade at all.

That doesn't matter you dumb fuck.

A lot of the time the most horrific experiences that slaves in America ever went through took place in Africa, that is where they were split up from their families and beaten into submission.

Really??? All you can offer up is whataboutism, Fuck off, I'm done with your Racism.

 

[stxjimmy]

The problem ultimately is that leftists aren’t really intelligent enough to understand history, they understand dates and names and can create a very basic timeline usually but historical context is rocket science to them.

They’re mentally deficient aren’t they.
It’s good you’re here to put everything into context.

 

[stxjimmy]

The people that were doing the kidnapping and starting the process of enslavement weren’t even white, the slaveowners weren’t driving the slave trade at all.

The slaveowners always got a bad press, fake news isn’t new.

 

[Sean Renaud]

All you are saying is that slavery is bad and that is obvious from a modern perspective where slavery is all but gone but in this time period slavery is normal and there are actually worse things that can happen to you.

The problem ultimately is that leftists aren’t really intelligent enough to understand history, they understand dates and names and can create a very basic timeline usually but historical context is rocket science to them.

There were plenty of people at the time who knew slavery was bad. Libs are generally better educated and it shows in our general views. A lot of us do not memorize too many names or dates. The WHY is what's important. What day Archduke Ferdinand was assassinated is much less important than that Europe was in the middle of an arms race. When you've got neat toys you want to use them you're just looking for an excuse. Besides until WW2 Europe would get together about every twenty odd years split up into teams and commit population control.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

How is anything I am saying racism?

It's not my role here to educate dumbfuck Racists.

If anything you are the racist for trying to demonize white slaveowners simply because they are white in a world where slavery was not just normal but expected and protected.

Demonise slaveholders, hmmm how much more do want them Demonised than they already are? I'm not the one defending them here, you are!

You can say that these people were on the wrong side of history because their way of life didn’t survive(even though they didn’t create it) and we found a better way but calling them evil is a whole different thing.

No calling it Evil is exactly the right thing, trying to defend them well, you're to fucking stupid to see what that makes you....*chuckles*

 

[Sean Renaud]

White slave owners should be demonized.

 

[ll74]

All you are saying is that slavery is bad and that is obvious from a modern perspective where slavery is all but gone but in this time period slavery is normal and there are actually worse things that can happen to you.

The problem ultimately is that leftists aren’t really intelligent enough to understand history, they understand dates and names and can create a very basic timeline usually but historical context is rocket science to them.

Yes....you're saying that some slavery wasn't as bad as other slavery.

Incorrect

Hey, it sucks that You're being forced to slave labor, but you know, someone could light you on fire and wouldn't that be worse??

Fuck off.

It doesn't matter that.slavery was the norm back in the day...the norm was shit...period. No shit was better than other shit.

 

[ll74]

How is anything I am saying racism?

If anything you are the racist for trying to demonize white slaveowners simply because they are white in a world where slavery was not just normal but expected and protected.

You can say that these people were on the wrong side of history because their way of life didn’t survive(even though they didn’t create it) and we found a better way but calling them evil is a whole different thing.

All slaveowners should be demonized. They kidnapped and forced human beings to do provide labor. They were shit human beings.

That's not racism....slavery was a horrible thing. Period. No other answer is needed.

And if they didn't know any better it's because they didn't strive to be any better.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

How is anything I am saying racism?

If anything you are the racist for trying to demonize white slaveowners simply because they are white in a world where slavery was not just normal but expected and protected.

You can say that these people were on the wrong side of history because their way of life didn’t survive(even though they didn’t create it) and we found a better way but calling them evil is a whole different thing.

John Brown knew that slavery was evil in the 1840s. Not everyone alive back then accepted the lie that slavery was proper and normal.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Education doesn’t make you intelligent,

You're a case in point on the above!

 

[Sean Renaud]

If leftists were actually intelligent they wouldn’t demonize the South while also demonizing the North for not being a strong enough contrast to the South and trying to pull bullshit like saying the 3/5ths compromise was a horrible thing denying the humanity of slaves on the North’s part. They wouldn’t be destroying statues of northerners who didn’t believe in integration(which was a batshit crazy idea at the time even to abolitionists) or removing statues of black slaves thanking Lincoln for freeing them or destroying statues of confederate soldiers who never saw a slave in their life that merely fought in the war as a warrior and a local hero etc.

Knowing how World War 1 was started is not the same thing as knowing why Archduke Ferdinand was killed and what kind of environment allowed him to be killed and how the rest of the world would have treated that kind of a situation if it happened in their backyard instead.

Education doesn’t make you intelligent, it doesn’t teach you how to be intelligent and if it is run by stupid people who don’t know how to use the resources they were given by their ancestors then education will actually have a negative effect on your intelligence. Educated people 40 years ago were vastly more intelligent on average than educated people today.

The North was far from perfect but the South was far, far worse. They should absolutely be demonized. The 3/5s compromise was horrible but not because denied slaves their humanity. It should have been zero. These are not legally people. Somehow 250 years later we're still feeling the reprocutions of that decision.

I agree that knowing why he was killed is important. Bruh educated people 40 years didn't know half as much as we do. Don't even pull that complete bullshit on me.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

John Brown was the embodiment of the white savior complex and kind of a psychopath. He was far from the norm. He believed that slavery was part of a race war against black people but yet he didn’t consider that black people in Africa were living far worse lives and therefore slavery couldn’t have been much of a race war.

John Brown is definitely similar to the modern leftist though, wanting to be a hero despite understanding basically nothing.

John Brown didn't care about what was going on in Africa. He saw evil happening right in front of him and took action to end it.

The black prisoners in the southern forced labor camps would have been fully justified in rising up against their captors, seizing the farms for themselves, and continuing to run them for their own benefit.

 

[Sean Renaud]

When you say that the North was far from perfect you are proving my point about not understanding context. And saying that it should have been zero is stupid as hell and would make black people today hate the North more than they already do for the 3/5th compromise. Black people today literally think that the North considered them as 3/5ths of a human(because they have no context), imagine if they said zero what they would think if the South actually agreed to that.

Outside of England the North at that time had the most anti slavery views in the world and it wasn’t even a close 2nd, expecting the North to be even more “progressive” for that time period is asinine. Hell, even the South was fairly progressive compared to the world at large and that is why you shouldn’t demonize them all that much either.

Progressive is kinda relative but before I digress. Black people today think both sides thought blacks weren't really people for the most part. The South would never have agreed to zero. Their political power was based on having a fairly large slave population and that gives them seats in the House. If I can't put my horse down as a dependent on my taxes they can't call people who are enslaved as part of your official population.

 

[stxjimmy]

John Brown was the embodiment of the white savior complex and kind of a psychopath. He was far from the norm. He believed that slavery was part of a race war against black people but yet he didn’t consider that black people in Africa were living far worse lives and therefore slavery couldn’t have been much of a race war.

John Brown is definitely similar to the modern leftist though, wanting to be a hero despite understanding basically nothing.

So in a way John brown could be said to have contributed to people in Africa dying as they couldn’t be brought to better lives as slaves in America?

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

He saw people dying who were trying to violently end slavery and he didn’t understand why anyone would defend slavery so he decided to kill those who were defending it just making everything worse.

He didn’t understand that slavery was not something that could just end overnight, you have to take away the incentives, you have to change hearts and minds and convince them that they are above slavery from a moral perspective despite the fact that everyone else was doing it, you have to destroy slavery in Africa(which is what the real heroes the British did despite getting no credit for it)etc.

The better thing for an abolitionist to do at that time would be to push for laws that made sure slaves were treated as humanely as possible given the circumstances and slowly chip away at it from that angle.

In the end, it turned out the slavers couldn't be gently coaxed away from their vile institution. Ending slavery required a bloodletting.

 

[Sean Renaud]

He saw people dying who were trying to violently end slavery and he didn’t understand why anyone would defend slavery so he decided to kill those who were defending it just making everything worse.

He didn’t understand that slavery was not something that could just end overnight, you have to take away the incentives, you have to change hearts and minds and convince them that they are above slavery from a moral perspective despite the fact that everyone else was doing it, you have to destroy slavery in Africa(which is what the real heroes the British did despite getting no credit for it)etc.

The better thing for an abolitionist to do at that time would be to push for laws that made sure slaves were treated as humanely as possible given the circumstances and slowly chip away at it from that angle.

While it can't change overnight sometimes killing a lot of people is the only viable answer. I genuinely don't understand why people on both sides are like "We have the 2nd amendment encase the government is out of control are the exact people saying we should go the Ghandi route.

 

[ll74]

In the end, it turned out the slavers couldn't be gently coaxed away from their vile institution. Ending slavery required a bloodletting.

And those that were evil were forced to relinquish their hold on society...allbeit not completely.

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

But your horse will always be a horse, they are not a person. Dependents are people who rely on you because they are either not yet capable of taking care of themselves or they are no longer able to when they once could.

Slaves are people before slavery so therefore they are still people during slavery, that is more or less how the North viewed the situation. The South low key also viewed slaves as people but they knew that the North did consider them people worthy of representation regardless so that is why they said the slaves should count.

As for black people thinking that the North and the South both didn’t consider them people, they are just wrong. They are filled with a sense of vengeance or victimhood or hate. The reality is that black slaves in America at that time were considered people more than the Irish were considered people by the English. The horror stories of black babies being fed to alligators that black people talk about to try to paint a picture of what slavery was like were considered acts of barbarism back then too.

The Irish still hate the English, so it's not surprising that many Americans whose ancestors were imprisoned in forced labor camps in the south might hold a grudge.