Fairfax County General :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
In conducting a comprehensive and detailed study of the competing antebellum civil societies(North and South), Dabney concluded, among other things, that antebellum slave labor was far less destructive influence on blacks than free labor in the North. He observed, in particular, that the crime rate among free blacks in Boston was over three times the crime rate compared to blacks held to slavery in Riuchmond. He made similar quality of life observations regarding poverty and birth-rates, and concluded that conditions in the South favored the blacks when compared to the quality of life for free blacks in the North. I found that both provocative and interesting.
Lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In conducting a comprehensive and detailed study
> of the competing antebellum civil societies(North
> and South), Dabney concluded, among other things,
> that antebellum slave labor was far less
> destructive influence on blacks than free labor in
> the North. He observed, in particular, that the
> crime rate among free blacks in Boston was over
> three times the crime rate compared to blacks held
> to slavery in Riuchmond. He made similar quality
> of life observations regarding poverty and
> birth-rates, and concluded that conditions in the
> South favored the blacks when compared to the
> quality of life for free blacks in the North. I
> found that both provocative and interesting.
"It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees!"
WIIMAN Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> good luck getting an intelligent responce here.
for sure, whinning about getting kicked out of school and traffic tickets seem to be the hot topics on this site,,,,definetly no think tank stuff going on///
Carmen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually, it's the incessant petty whining about
> criticism of the school board that is getting
> incredibly annoying.
So true, so true...if the whiners were certified MILFs, like oaktonmom, it'd be one thing...but most of them are anonymous, hence fat and undesirable.
Dammit.
Although Spunky is registered, AND fat and undesirable; I guess I could be wrong here.
______________________________________________
I have had to change the addresses to my retaliatory blogs over half a dozen times.
Good call Carmen. The school board is abusive and nazi like and to say so is entirely appropriate. I also can't stand the whiners in support of FCPS boo-hooing becasue they get criticized. Especially since they are fat and undesirable.
If white, brown, red, or yellow became the new slave skin color, and all members of that race in a certain country were used as slaves, they woulnd't be free to commit any crimes. Of course the crime rate for that demographic would go down.
Then, after a couple hundred years, set them free to do whatever the hell they want to again. Of course the crime rate's going to go up for that demographic.
Whoever funded this study gave Dabney $5.00 in grant money and got $6.00 change.
Im sure the antebellum south kept accurate records on the daily violence perpetrated on it's slave population. This is a discusting subject and only shows that racism is alive and well.
Im sure the antebellum north kept accurate records on the daily violence perpetrated on it's "free" black population. This is a discusting subject and only shows that political correctness is alive and well.
If the slaves had concealed handguns, they could have stopped all the violence perpetrated against them by the Fairfax county public schools. And finally they would have been free to denounce the Mike O'Meara show once and for all
Kep Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Im sure the antebellum north kept accurate records
> on the daily violence perpetrated on it's "free"
> black population. This is a discusting subject and
> only shows that political correctness is alive and
> well.
This has nothing to do with political correctness. It is a matter of human decency. Violence against people free or slaved is horrific...trying to use statistics to prove that one form of violence against people was more humane then another form of human violence is discusting. Violence against freeman or slave
is and always has been a terrible thing. Nothing is gained from comparing the two except some sort of perverse justification of one vs the other.
"Im sure the antebellum north kept accurate records on the daily violence perpetrated on it's "free" black population. This is a discusting subject and only shows that political correctness is alive and well."
This has nothing to do with racism. It is a matter of human decency. Violent crime against people free or slaved is horrific...trying to use statistics to prove that one form of violence against people was more humane then another form of human violence is discusting. Criminalviolence against freeman or slave
is and always has been a terrible thing. Nothing is gained from comparing the two except some sort of perverse justification of one vs the other.
"If blacks were better off as slaves, then why wouldn't whites be better off as slaves? Why don't you sign up to become a slave, then?"
You missed the point entirely. The point is not that the black southern slaves were necessarily better off as slaves, it is that they were better off than their "free" black counterparts in the north.
Lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "If blacks were better off as slaves, then why
> wouldn't whites be better off as slaves? Why don't
> you sign up to become a slave, then?"
>
> You missed the point entirely. The point is not
> that the black southern slaves were necessarily
> better off as slaves, it is that they were better
> off than their "free" black counterparts in the
> north.
So your point is that Blacks were horribly mistreated before 1865.
Yeah, nothing says "superior quality of life" more than being owned by another human being for the purpose of forced labor. I can't imagine why anyone wouldn't love something like that.
Lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The point is that southern slaves had a superior
> quality of life compared to blacks in the north.
"Yeah, nothing says "superior quality of life" more than being owned by another human being for the purpose of forced labor. I can't imagine why anyone wouldn't love something like that."
Well. let's just see if anyone did love smething like that:
"Was Marse Moseley god to us? Lord honey hoow you talk. Course he was! He was de bes white man in de lan'. Us had eve'y thing ddat we could hope to eat
So somehow that bit of nonsense is supposed to make a convincing argument for whatever point you are trying to make?
Lee Wrote:
-----------------------------------------------
>
>
> Well. let's just see if anyone did love smething
> like that:
>
> "Was Marse Moseley god to us? Lord honey hoow you
> talk. Course he was! He was de bes white man in de
> lan'. Us had eve'y thing ddat we could hope to eat
Lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The point is that southern slaves had a superior
> quality of life compared to blacks in the north.
It's a ridiculous point to make..and of absolutley no value if true or not.
Southern slaves had more of an opportunity to steal and commit crimes against others, because they had access to their owners and their property.
Slaves in the South were taken care of much better then their northern equivalents and after the civil war were given land, in addition to having food and their families. Those in the North had to start from scratch, resulting in higher crime.
The South was an easier place to live then the North and were treated as they should be, as people, after the war. Slavery was wrong, sending the Indians away on "The trail of tears", was wrong and they were also enslaved by whites.
Lincoln only made freeing the slaves as an issue, long after the war started in order to gain popularity. Booth, killed Lincoln, once he realized he was doomed after being on the run, Booth wrote a journal of his reality. Upon being caught there were several pages removed from Booth's journal. I think those stolen pages would have been very enlighting. Lincoln has been called GAY and a JEW, does that matter? Anyone know the nationality of the carpetbaggers?
The civil war was based on economics, so is Iraq and Afganistan...are Jews and Gays trouble-makers or money-makers?
You lose what you don't use...I like thinking...as for the rest of you speak for yourselves.
Stay Away From Twitter !
Twitter is a very dangerous place to use if you value your privacy and security. I joined a few weeks ago, but have seen the light after reading their privacy policy. It is just like face book only worse! Not only do they record your login information and record your preferences, every time you post something it is logged in with the time, as if they are keeping a record on everyone. This could be very easy for our Federal Government to use to keep tabs on people. It sounds crazy to some, but our personal freedoms here in the United States are in jeapordy! With the president we have in office, nothing is secure anymore. We need to take action and make sure that we are wise and informed. This has been set in place for quite awhile, but I believe its so that when the New World Order comes, it can be a form of entrapment. I am closeing my Twitter account soon, and even though I do, I'm not sure how good it will be since they already have logged my information, and I have written in it. However, at least its a step in the right direction. I thought Myspace and Facebook were evil enough, but I believe with Twitter's charm and innocent like personality, it will fool a lot more people, and may just be the thing that rides the tide into Kingdom Come.
Kit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "...Slavery was wrong, sending the Indians away on
> "The trail of tears", was wrong and they were also
> enslaved by whites."
>
> Except that the slaves were typically purchased
> from black tribal leaders who had enslaved their
> fellow blacks in order to sell them for profit.
And what is the supposed significance of this fact? The fact that blacks sold blacks to whites in to slavery doesnt discount the evil of the whites involved.
Kit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "...Slavery was wrong, sending the Indians away on
> "The trail of tears", was wrong and they were also
> enslaved by whites."
>
> Except that the slaves were typically purchased
> from black tribal leaders who had enslaved their
> fellow blacks in order to sell them for profit.
Are you saying that this didn't happen with Indians too?
Tribes fought one another and took people as slaves from other
tribes. Had the Indians worked together instead of against one
another, there would have been a greater Indian Nation, same for
Africans. Who would have benefited from problems amoungest tribes?
"And what is the supposed significance of this fact? The fact that blacks sold blacks to whites in to slavery doesnt discount the evil of the whites involved."
And how is this meaningful? The fact that the whites held slaves in no may minimizes or discounts the evil of the blacks involved
You all can be cute by replacing "white" with "black" all you want...I agree that blacks and northerners involved in the slave trade or perpetuating violence on blacks were just a s guilty as anyone in the south. But the thing is..they arent on here trying to defend their actions...southern whites are. It's a ridiculous discussion with no valid explanation other then racism.
If no one is advocating the return of blacks to chattel slavery, pointing out that the life of enslaved blacks was somehow 'better' than their free brothers in the North (and I have no idea how Dabney's study was conducted) is little more than an irrelevant historical fact.
No more an irrelevant historical fact than any other historical fact. Beyond this, it merely serves as a general reminder that Southerners (Virginians in this case) were no more guilty of committing injustices than their Northern brethern, a fact that is quite often overlooked, (much like Abraham Lincoln's white supremacy gets overlooked-or deliberately swept under the rug).
Kit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "It's a ridiculous discussion with no valid
> explanation other then racism."
>
> That's a ridiculous comment, with no valid
> explanation other than ignorance.
oh really..please make some conclusions based on the "fact" that northern freed men were treatd worse the enslaved men. I dare you to make one without sounding racist.
Lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No more an irrelevant historical fact than any
> other historical fact. Beyond this, it merely
> serves as a general reminder that Southerners
> (Virginians in this case) were no more guilty of
> committing injustices than their Northern
> brethern, a fact that is quite often overlooked,
> (much like Abraham Lincoln's white supremacy gets
> overlooked-or deliberately swept under the rug).
And what is the significance of this fact other then to backhandedly make the case that slavery wasnt so bad?
And anyone who has bothered to read more then whatthey read here on FU knows that Linclon was a man of his day..that he statrted out as a white supremist...but then evloved. Did he evlove into a 21st century man of equality...probably not...but he did evolve to the point of wanting to grant citizenship to every freed slave...which was revolutionary even in his day.
Bottomline..there is no defense for VA in its racial relations history.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/15/2009 04:09PM by Vince(1).
h really..please make some conclusions based on the "fact" that northern "freed" men were treatd worse the "enslaved" men. I dare you to make one without sounding like an obsequious, groveling panty-waist.
And what is the significance of this fact other then to backhandedly make the case that norhten racism wasnt so bad?
And anyone who has bothered to read more then what they read here on FU knows that Linclon was hate-filled racist and white-supremacist.that he statrted and finished as a white supremist...and did not evlove. Did he evlove into a 21st century man of equality...certainly not...and he did not evolve to the point of wanting to grant citizenship to every freed slave...which was revolutionary even in his day, given the racism that existed in Illinois and New York
Bottomline..there is no defense for Illinois and New York in its racial relations history.
"...I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people..."
Pie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "...I will say then that I am not, nor ever have
> been, in favor of bringing about in any way the
> social and political equality of the white and
> black races, that I am not, nor ever have been, in
> favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor
> of qualifying them to hold office, nor to
> intermarry with white people..."
>
> -Abraham Lincoln 1858 (age 49)
>
> How evolved!!!
But Bennett was looking at remarks made in the mid-19th century through a 21st century prism. Springfield, Illinois, where Lincoln worked as a young lawyer, was a frontier town inhabited by white southern settlers. Very few of the hundred or so blacks who lived there had any level of education and it was not until Lincoln moved to the White House that he had any real chance to meet black people on an equal footing. This was the background to Lincoln's prejudice.
However, as Henry Louis Gates Jr and John Stauffer wrote in the New York Times this week, once in office Lincoln met with more black leaders than any president before him. By 1865, after the Civil War, Lincoln was advocating giving the vote to the African-Americans who had fought with the Union.
And the politician whose view he most wanted to hear on a draft of his famous second inaugural speech - "Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away" - was a black man, Frederick Douglass.
As Lincoln told Douglass: "There is no man in the country whose opinion I value more than yours".
Lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And what is the significance of this fact other
> then to backhandedly make the case that norhten
> racism wasnt so bad?
>
> And anyone who has bothered to read more then what
> they read here on FU knows that Linclon was
> hate-filled racist and white-supremacist.that he
> statrted and finished as a white supremist...and
> did not evlove. Did he evlove into a 21st century
> man of equality...certainly not...and he did not
> evolve to the point of wanting to grant
> citizenship to every freed slave...which was
> revolutionary even in his day, given the racism
> that existed in Illinois and New York
>
> Bottomline..there is no defense for Illinois and
> New York in its racial relations history.
DO you really think making these changes makes a point? I have already stated that neither New York...Va..or IL have any right to defend their race relations at just about any point in history. But a state that closed public schools rather then intergrate them is certinly at the top list of shameful actors.
> DO you really think making these changes makes a
> point? I have already stated that neither New
> York...Va..or IL have any right to defend their
> race relations at just about any point in history.
> But a state that closed public schools rather
> then intergrate them is certinly at the top list
> of shameful actors.
No states require any "right to defend their race relations". Slavery has existed continuously throughout all recorded human history, so trying to beat the dead horse of antebellum slavery is very boring.
""I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."
"But a state that closed public schools rather then intergrate them is certinly at the top list of shameful actors."
And a State, like Massachusetts, that has violent riots while resisting federally mandated school intergration is also and most certainly, at the top oof the list of shameful actors.
Frank Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince(1) Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > DO you really think making these changes makes
> a
> > point? I have already stated that neither New
> > York...Va..or IL have any right to defend their
> > race relations at just about any point in
> history.
> > But a state that closed public schools rather
> > then intergrate them is certinly at the top
> list
> > of shameful actors.
>
> No states require any "right to defend their race
> relations". Slavery has existed continuously
> throughout all recorded human history, so trying
> to beat the dead horse of antebellum slavery is
> very boring.
You act as if I started this thread..I didnt. WHile it may be boring...people who try and distort history need to be straightened out.
Lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "But a state that closed public schools rather
> then intergrate them is certinly at the top list
> of shameful actors."
>
>
> And a State, like Massachusetts, that has violent
> riots while resisting federally mandated school
> intergration is also and most certainly, at the
> top oof the list of shameful actors.
Jesus f-ing Christ already...yesssss....there is prejudice everywhere...eevn in the north...but if you want to equate the history of the south to the north...good luck! You will suceed only in your mind and in anyone foolish...stupid or racist enough to believe you.
"people who try and distort history need to be straightened out."
Precisely. Which is why it is important that Virginians (and Southerners) reconize that they are no more responsible for slavery than African tribal slave profiteers, or the New Enland slave traders (Brown University, for example, was named after a propsperous slave-trader).
"if you want to equate the history of the south to the north...good luck! You will suceed only in your mind and in anyone foolish...stupid or racist enough to believe you."
And if you want to try and equate the history of the south to the north...good luck! You will suceed only in your misguided little mind and in anyone foolish, ignorant,stupid or self-loathing enough to believe you.
8.5 million children a year are currently being sold into slavery...whose fault is that? I would say mostly whites, this is worse then any slavery associated with the Civil War, because we should have evolved...no?
This is a sad commentary about people and how evil they can be, all greed and very little compassion. Oh! This also has a lot to do with where we are in our economy now, no concern for others.
Lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "if you want to equate the history of the south to
> the north...good luck! You will suceed only in
> your mind and in anyone foolish...stupid or racist
> enough to believe you."
>
> And if you want to try and equate the history of
> the south to the north...good luck! You will
> suceed only in your misguided little mind and in
> anyone foolish, ignorant,stupid or self-loathing
> enough to believe you.
You are one dumb fuck.,..as dumb as the war criminal your screen name attempts to honor.
The South lost the War. Get over it. And Virginia becomes less and less "southern" every day.
One good things a few northern blacks did, albeit under orders from whites, was burn down Darien, GA. It's also a pity that Sherman didn't march on and destroy Richmond and Fredericksburg, but he was a northern gentleman and not murderous southern scum.
The North, in fact, lost the War. So admit it and get over it buddy boy. And Virginia becomes less and less "northern" every day.
One good things a few northern whitesd did, albeit as a disorganized mob, was burn down the negro orphanage home during the NY draft riots. It's also a pity that Boothe didn't also execute Grant and Seward, but he was a Southern gentleman and not a mass-murdering northern scum like Sherman and Sheridan.
Lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince wrote:
>
> "You are one dumb fuck.,..as dumb as the war
> criminal your screen name attempts to honor."
>
> You sure are one dumb fucking asshole bub.,..as
> dumb as the northern drunkard war criminal (Grant)
> and New England slave traders you attempt to
> honor.
I'll give you this much...there is no more violent creature on the face of the earth then the european white man...whether he ended up in the north or south. But the violence against blacks in the south was very unique in its legalization of the slave class. Unque from many other forms of slavery throughout the world.
Vince wrote:
"I'll give you this much...there is no more violent creature on the face of the earth then the european white man...whether he ended up in the north or south. But the violence against blacks in the south was very unique in its legalization of the slave class. Unque from many other forms of slavery throughout the world."
Well then, I'll give you this much in return...there is no more violent creature on the face of the earth than the african black man...whether he ended up in Detroit or New Orleans. But the violence and racism against blacks in the north was very unique in its open hatred and oppression of the blacks; the Northen Black Codes merely scratched the surface. Unique and distinct from many other forms of racism throughout the world.
"But the violence against blacks in the south was very unique in its legalization of the slave class."
What kind of simple-minded ignorant dipshit wrtes something like this? How about the French black slaves in Haiti or the Spanish black slaves througout Brazil and South America? How about the black slaves in New York, Rhode Island and New Jersey. For chrissakes, how about the blacks who owned the black slaves in Africa before selling them to the British, Dutch, German, and Portugese slave traders? What a phukking moron.
Lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince wrote:
> "I'll give you this much...there is no more
> violent creature on the face of the earth then the
> european white man...whether he ended up in the
> north or south. But the violence against blacks in
> the south was very unique in its legalization of
> the slave class. Unque from many other forms of
> slavery throughout the world."
>
> Well then, I'll give you this much in
> return...there is no more violent creature on the
> face of the earth than the african black
> man...whether he ended up in Detroit or New
> Orleans. But the violence and racism against
> blacks in the north was very unique in its open
> hatred and oppression of the blacks; the Northen
> Black Codes merely scratched the surface. Unique
> and distinct from many other forms of racism
> throughout the world.
Reed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "But the violence against blacks in the south was
> very unique in its legalization of the slave
> class."
>
> What kind of simple-minded ignorant dipshit wrtes
> something like this? How about the French black
> slaves in Haiti or the Spanish black slaves
> througout Brazil and South America? How about the
> black slaves in New York, Rhode Island and New
> Jersey. For chrissakes, how about the blacks who
> owned the black slaves in Africa before selling
> them to the British, Dutch, German, and Portugese
> slave traders? What a phukking moron.
And how do any of those facts dismiss or explain the unique cruelty dished out by the US SOuthern whites? Not a thing. Yes there were many dirty hands...the dirtiest being southern!
And how do any of those facts dismiss or explain the unique cruelty dished out by the US SOuthern whites? Not a thing. Yes there were many dirty hands...the dirtiest being southern!
Only a dimwitted asshole like this Vince specimen could get worked up over something that happened almost 200 hundred years ago. Why not tell us about the Battle of the Boyne too dickhead.
Wilkins Micawber Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>>
> Only a dimwitted asshole like this Vince specimen
> could get worked up over something that happened
> almost 200 hundred years ago. Why not tell us
> about the Battle of the Boyne too dickhead.
I truly fail to understand why you consider me so "worked up"? I didnt start this thread. Someone who evidently feels VA and other states have gotten a bum wrap for 200 or more odd years of slavery...followed by another 100 years of terrorist activity against blacks equal to the treatment they recieved in the north started it. Someone who fails to explain why if things were so terrible in the north...slaves escaped to the north...why during the early 20th century blacks migrated to the north in droves to escape southern hostility.
I guess he's explain it by saying "those black folks...just didnt know any better!"
But...all he will do is change north to south....white to black and think that is an intelligent addressing of the issue he brought up...not me. Im just setting the record straight....the south was guilty of horrendous acts of cruelty to blacks for all of the 17th..18th...19th...and most of the 20th century.
"And how do any of those facts dismiss or explain the unique cruelty dished out by the US SOuthern whites? Not a thing. Yes there were many dirty hands...the dirtiest being southern!"
But really, how do any of those facts dismiss or explain the unique cruelty dished out by the US NOrthern whites? Not a thing. Yes there were many dirty hands...the dirtiest, by far being northern!
I did start this thread. Someone who evidently feels Masschsetts and other states have gotten a bum wrap for 200 or more odd years of slavery and slave-trading...followed by another 100 years of terrorist activity against blacks equal to the treatment they recieved in the south started it. Someone who fails to explain why if things were so terrible in the south... why only a teensy-weens percentage of slaves ever bothered trying to escaped to the canada because they were hated in the north...why during all that time states like Illinois and Oregon hated blacks so intensely they actually made it ulawful for them to move into their states.
I guess he's explain it by saying "those black folks...just didnt know any better!"
But...all he will do is change south to north....white to black and think that is an intelligent addressing of the issue he brought up...not me. Im just setting the record straight....the north was guilty of horrendous acts of cruelty to blacks for all of the 17th..18th...19th...and most of the 20th century. And the most vicious (and prosperous of course) of all the slave-trading states was dear ol Rhode Island, the slave-trading capital of north america
The North did not ban slavery because they felt it was cruel and inhumane, many felt that way, but they still relied on the interstate trade of cotton and other goods from the South. There was not a "need" for slavery in the North, as agriculture was not as large as in the South. The North hardly treated Blacks much better, and still had Jim Crow laws or de facto segregation.
Stop with the geographical and racial bias, PLEASE.
Manute Bol for Three! WTF. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Manute Bol was recently enslaved in Sudan and had to buy his own freedom, sad case.
Read a Book Please Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince(1) Wrote:
> >
> why during the early 20th century blacks
> > migrated to the north in droves to escape
> southern
> > hostility.
>
> Because there were better job opportunities in the
> industrialized North?
So..you buy into the logic that blacks migrated to the south and into slavery because of job opportunities? Thats the logic being presented by Mr Lee. Yes..there were job opportunities...there were other opportunities also...opoortunity not to be lynched...not to be arrrested for vagrancy and enslaved in the prison system...the opportunity to ride in the front of the bus.
Mr. Lee..you mention Rhode Island..and that is your best point yet. Yet you fail to explain...you'd rather play your silly mimicing game rather then make a valid point. But to address it...the family in Rhode Island acknowledges the sins of the fore-fathers..not excuses like you are.
o..you buy into the logic that blacks migrated to the canada because of northern hatred of blacks? Thats not the logic being presented by Mr Vince. Yes..there were no job opportunities for blacks, racism was too deep in the north...there were other opportunities also...opoortunity not to be lynched, like the murderous mobs of the New York draft riots ruthlessly lynched and burned alive the blacks roaming the streets...not to be arrrested for vagrancy and enslaved in the northern prison system...the opportunity to ride in the back of the bus...the opportunnity to die young because you had no access to health care like the southern slaves did..
Mr. Vince..you mention Rhode Island, but you don't mention the slave-traders of Massachsetts, and New York..and you fail to mention that Abraham Lincoln himself, as an attorney, once represented a slave owner trying to recover an escaped slave..you also doon't mention that slavery was perfectly legal in the Union states of New Jersey, Missouri, Kentucky, Delaware, and Maryland, or that the Union admitted West Virgina as a slave state in the middle oof the war..you also don't mention that Illiniois and Oregon had contitutional provisions preventing blacks from moving into their states...why iks that?
Lee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mr Vince:
>
>
> Mr. Vince..you mention Rhode Island, but you don't
> mention the slave-traders of Massachsetts, and New
> York..and you fail to mention that Abraham Lincoln
> himself, as an attorney, once represented a slave
> owner trying to recover an escaped slave..you also
> doon't mention that slavery was perfectly legal in
> the Union states of New Jersey, Missouri,
> Kentucky, Delaware, and Maryland, or that the
> Union admitted West Virgina as a slave state in
> the middle oof the war..you also don't mention
> that Illiniois and Oregon had contitutional
> provisions preventing blacks from moving into
> their states...why iks that?
Because I am not trying to defend anyone's behavior. We are talking about degrees of culpability...and on the issue of slavery,,,the South leads the pack. If nothing else..the fact that the North made the Civil War a war to free the slaves made them less culpable.
What's most disturbing in your logic..is the use of the mob mentality to justify behavior. Just because there were major issues of hypocricy on the part of Norhern..Western and every state in between...does nothing to excuse the South's even more extreme behavior aginst blacks.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/17/2009 07:59PM by Vince(1).
LOL!!! You spread ignorance like the plague. You're such a crazy, pissed off, racist piece of shit Vince, eat a dick already. People are better off without your horse shit spin on things.
Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Frank Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Vince(1) Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > > DO you really think making these changes
> makes
> > a
> > > point? I have already stated that neither
> New
> > > York...Va..or IL have any right to defend
> their
> > > race relations at just about any point in
> > history.
> > > But a state that closed public schools
> rather
> > > then intergrate them is certinly at the top
> > list
> > > of shameful actors.
> >
> > No states require any "right to defend their
> race
> > relations". Slavery has existed continuously
> > throughout all recorded human history, so
> trying
> > to beat the dead horse of antebellum slavery is
> > very boring.
>
>
> You act as if I started this thread..I didnt.
> WHile it may be boring...people who try and
> distort history need to be straightened out.
"Because I am not trying to defend anyone's behavior. We are talking about degrees of culpability...and on the issue of slavery,,,the South leads the pack. If nothing else..the fact that the North made the Civil War a war to free the slaves made them less culpable."
"What's most disturbing in your logic..is the use of the mob mentality to justify behavior. Just because there were major issues of hypocricy on the part of Norhern..Western and every state in between...does nothing to excuse the South's even more extreme behavior aginst blacks."
A perfectly childish, superficial, ignorant, uninformed, and utterly erroneous viewpoint. Without question, the black antebellum agricultural laborers("slaves" if you insist) had a far superior quality of life than their "free" black counterparts in the north. The black Southern agricultural laborers were better fed, clothed, housed, and cared for (access to professional medical care) than the blacks in the north ever dreamed of. The blacks in the north were hated, demeaned, despised, marginalized, and brutally maltreated. And this violent and inveterate northern racism cannot be explained away as a mere remnant of the slave-trading attitudes; it was far more sinister and calculated than that. Indeed, the grotesque atrocities commited aginst Southern blacks by marauding northern soldiers shocks the conscience. All said, the odious and ugly anti-negro racism exhibited in the north is unparalleled.
As for the ludicrous and laughable claim that the north fought the war to free the slaves, if you believe that garbage, you must be a member of the flat-earth society.
Wow...you are truly a neo-Confederate...with your own jargon...antebellum agricultural laborers...what a discusting white racist terminology for the the horror of slavery.
Again sir...I do not think this country has anything to be proud about in it's relationships with blacks..native americans or just about any other minority group. Our history when dealing with minorities is more the tyranny of the majority over the minority. You sir...in jargonizing the correct term...slave...have shown your colors. Anyone who feels the need to soften the term...slave....is a discusting human being.
Spare me your phony and theatrical indignation; your own despicable language, false doctrines, and opprobrious propaganda fully reveal your foul and hate-filled and attitudes. That you persist in deliberately mischaracterizing the social organization of the antebullum United States, north and South, and that you have openly declared your hellish existence only increases your sad state of ignominy. May God have mercy on you.
Virginia sucks. Ive lived all over the world and in six differant states. Virginia is the blowiest of them all. Ice land ranks higher than Va and that place is constantly COLD and has elves and trolls. Not just internet trolls but real nose picking, living under a bridge TROLLS.