Jason Whitlock: Colin Kaepernick is a fraud
Comments
-
This is a very quality post.Houhusky said:The US didnt abolish slavery first but it was the first country founded on the ideals of the Scottish Enlightenment, natural/inalienable rights, and individual liberty.
The articles of confederation (the first Constitution of the US) was signed by 48 people from 13 states, all signers exhibited considerable aversion to slavery except for those from South Carolina and Georgia. The compromise, in 1787, was that all new states admitted to the union in what was considered then to be the Northwest territory (Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and the part of Minnesota) would be slave free states. Haiti, significantly smaller, was the first country in the Western Hemisphere to ban slavery in 1804.
The US was ahead of its time in the ratification of law setting aside significant land that would exist as slave free. If not for having to fight the American Revolution the US would have very likely had the stomach and resources to abolish slavery outright within its boarders upon its formation.
The foundation of the country was largely set by anti slavery economists and philosophers like Adam Smith, Benjamin Rush, Arthur Lee, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Thomas Paine, and Thomas Jefferson.
The reality of US involvement in slavery is complicated. We were basically held hostage by a fairly small minority of slave owners for a long damn time until we finally got pissed enough about it to elect a President from an abolitionist party and the slavers got so triggered that they seceded. -
I'd wager it wouldn't change much if they were, though I agree more knowledge and understanding of history is always better.TurdBomber said:
I'd venture a guess that 95% of BLM activists and Allies are completely unaware of this, too.SFGbob said:
That's not a accident that you don't know that. That information is intentionally downplayed.Swaye said:Great graphic and HOLY SHIT, I had no idea more slaves went to South America and the West Indies than the rest of the world by a factor of like 10. Brazil needs to pay reparations stat!
-
Sort of like cancel culture now, in reverse. Small minority of loud mouth idiots on twitter holding the country hostage for perceived injustices that most of the time are a figment of their imaginations. They should all spend more time thinking about the misplaced male aggression inherent in skyscrapers imho.dnc said:
This is a very quality post.Houhusky said:The US didnt abolish slavery first but it was the first country founded on the ideals of the Scottish Enlightenment, natural/inalienable rights, and individual liberty.
The articles of confederation (the first Constitution of the US) was signed by 48 people from 13 states, all signers exhibited considerable aversion to slavery except for those from South Carolina and Georgia. The compromise, in 1787, was that all new states admitted to the union in what was considered then to be the Northwest territory (Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and the part of Minnesota) would be slave free states. Haiti, significantly smaller, was the first country in the Western Hemisphere to ban slavery in 1804.
The US was ahead of its time in the ratification of law setting aside significant land that would exist as slave free. If not for having to fight the American Revolution the US would have very likely had the stomach and resources to abolish slavery outright within its boarders upon its formation.
The foundation of the country was largely set by anti slavery economists and philosophers like Adam Smith, Benjamin Rush, Arthur Lee, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Thomas Paine, and Thomas Jefferson.
The reality of US involvement in slavery is complicated. We were basically held hostage by a fairly small minority of slave owners for a long damn time until we finally got pissed enough about it to elect a President from an abolitionist party and the slavers got so triggered that they seceded.
So, in essence, Antifa/CHOP/SJW fags on Twitter are slavers.
My logic is sound. I will entertain no questions. If you disagree, fight me. 7-11 at dawn. -
Again focused on the smaller details and not the big picture.dnc said:
But it does have a bearing on your argument because if that .5 million was spread between Peru and Chile than neither imported more than the US.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
This is fucking ridiculous. You are better than this.dnc said:
Doogs hate factsPostGameOrangeSlices said:
Great getting stuck in the minutia of the details as always. My point stands. Chile, Peru, who gives a shit? Where are they now? They died before the abolition from overwork, exhaustion, torturednc said:
Pretty sure you're reading the chart wrong on Chile. It's either .5 a million to Peru or .5 a million total to Peru and Chile, I'm not sure which. But every source I can find says a. Chile never imported nearly as many slaves as the surrounding areas because it was so poor and b. Chile was the second nation in the Americas to abolish slavery outright (after Haiti).PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Exactly. On a global scale the lucky slaves ended up in America. It's why we have 30 million plus African Americans in this country who have a huge influence on culture, pop culture, our economy, etc.SFGbob said:
Check out the numbers on the mortality rates and lifespan for African slaves that were shipped to South America and the Caribbean. One of the reasons why they needed so many of them.Swaye said:
What were they doing down there? We have cotton in the US and Sugar Cane in the indies, what was slavery used for in Brazil (and how could you need 5 MILLION people to do it)? Is there a great wall of South America that stretches around the continent or some shit?dnc said:
Yeah Brazil was the worst of the worst in both quantity and length. Rio De Janeiro alone had more slaves come through it's port than most other nations of the world (including the US).Swaye said:Great graphic and HOLY SHIT, I had no idea more slaves went to South America and the West Indies than the rest of the world by a factor of like 10. Brazil needs to pay reparations stat!
It's grim.
How come Chile doesnt have many black people in it? They had the same amount of slaves as the US according to those charts...
Because the Spanish were indescribably cruel to everyone and most slaves in Spanish countries died
It is blowing my mind that more people dont know this
I'm pretty sure the Chilean slavery population was much lower than the US's but it's hard to find hard numbers.
This thread went from America was the fucking worst and South America did things the right way along with Europe, to splitting hairs over which shitty SA country was actually the worst for the survival of their slaves, of which they had millions more of than the US ever did.
Hth, fuck off
The fact is I was correct in the point I was making. You were ignoring the bigger point to focus on whether it was Peru or Chile and it had no bearing on my argument
Jesus
As if Chile having 400,000 and Peru 100,000 makes a fucking difference when neither country has barely any black people. If they were like the US they would have millions.
Im right. Case closed. Fuck off. -
Don't even get me started on Cortez's killing sprees throughout today's Mexico. Amazing Brutality.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Exactly. On a global scale the lucky slaves ended up in America. It's why we have 30 million plus African Americans in this country who have a huge influence on culture, pop culture, our economy, etc.SFGbob said:
Check out the numbers on the mortality rates and lifespan for African slaves that were shipped to South America and the Caribbean. One of the reasons why they needed so many of them.Swaye said:
What were they doing down there? We have cotton in the US and Sugar Cane in the indies, what was slavery used for in Brazil (and how could you need 5 MILLION people to do it)? Is there a great wall of South America that stretches around the continent or some shit?dnc said:
Yeah Brazil was the worst of the worst in both quantity and length. Rio De Janeiro alone had more slaves come through it's port than most other nations of the world (including the US).Swaye said:Great graphic and HOLY SHIT, I had no idea more slaves went to South America and the West Indies than the rest of the world by a factor of like 10. Brazil needs to pay reparations stat!
It's grim.
How come Chile doesnt have many black people in it? They had the same amount of slaves as the US according to those charts...
Because the Spanish were indescribably cruel to everyone and most slaves in Spanish countries died
It is blowing my mind that more people dont know this -
well we? might as well cover the darker side of this issue also
black ownership of slaves - it is an informative article
https://www.africanamerica.org/topic/did-black-people-own-slaves
So what do the actual numbers of black slave owners and their slaves tell us? In 1830, the year most carefully studied by Carter G. Woodson, about 13.7 percent (319,599) of the black population was free. Of these, 3,776 free Negroes owned 12,907 slaves, out of a total of 2,009,043 slaves owned in the entire United States, so the numbers of slaves owned by black people over all was quite small by comparison with the number owned by white people. -
Would they at least start burning Brazilian Flags, too? Fair is Fair.dnc said:
I'd wager it wouldn't change much if they were, though I agree more knowledge and understanding of history is always better.TurdBomber said:
I'd venture a guess that 95% of BLM activists and Allies are completely unaware of this, too.SFGbob said:
That's not a accident that you don't know that. That information is intentionally downplayed.Swaye said:Great graphic and HOLY SHIT, I had no idea more slaves went to South America and the West Indies than the rest of the world by a factor of like 10. Brazil needs to pay reparations stat!
-
It's interesting but basically a historical footnote.LebamDawg said:well we? might as well cover the darker side of this issue also
black ownership of slaves - it is an informative article
https://www.africanamerica.org/topic/did-black-people-own-slaves
So what do the actual numbers of black slave owners and their slaves tell us? In 1830, the year most carefully studied by Carter G. Woodson, about 13.7 percent (319,599) of the black population was free. Of these, 3,776 free Negroes owned 12,907 slaves, out of a total of 2,009,043 slaves owned in the entire United States, so the numbers of slaves owned by black people over all was quite small by comparison with the number owned by white people. -
Do the descendants of the slave-owning blacks get reparations for their great-great-great grandpop holding slaves? Or are they pitching in with me, whose ancestors didn’t hit the shore of the States until 1910? Take up some slack.dnc said:
It's interesting but basically a historical footnote.LebamDawg said:well we? might as well cover the darker side of this issue also
black ownership of slaves - it is an informative article
https://www.africanamerica.org/topic/did-black-people-own-slaves
So what do the actual numbers of black slave owners and their slaves tell us? In 1830, the year most carefully studied by Carter G. Woodson, about 13.7 percent (319,599) of the black population was free. Of these, 3,776 free Negroes owned 12,907 slaves, out of a total of 2,009,043 slaves owned in the entire United States, so the numbers of slaves owned by black people over all was quite small by comparison with the number owned by white people. -
Ah. So it's not the institution of slavery that's the problem. It's the number you own.dnc said:
It's interesting but basically a historical footnote.LebamDawg said:well we? might as well cover the darker side of this issue also
black ownership of slaves - it is an informative article
https://www.africanamerica.org/topic/did-black-people-own-slaves
So what do the actual numbers of black slave owners and their slaves tell us? In 1830, the year most carefully studied by Carter G. Woodson, about 13.7 percent (319,599) of the black population was free. Of these, 3,776 free Negroes owned 12,907 slaves, out of a total of 2,009,043 slaves owned in the entire United States, so the numbers of slaves owned by black people over all was quite small by comparison with the number owned by white people.
How many slaves can a person own without getting in trouble, then?
