Nubly's thread.

[Deleted member 33117]

All I can say is wow. I know many intelligent and educated black people who do not feel that anyone owes them anything.

Personally the RARE individual who thinks I do, I just explain that my ancestors were in the mountains of Czechloslovakia when their ancestors were slaves, and their assumption that due to my beind white that my ancestors had anything to do with this event is ignorant. Truthfully, I have had black friends who would tell these individuals they were ignorant as well.

I didn't feel like reading the entire thread or all of the crap on it. Just wanted to state me case where it could be seen.

::shakes head::

 

[BO-DEN]

All I can say is wow. I know many intelligent and educated black people who do not feel that anyone owes them anything.

Personally the RARE individual who thinks I do, I just explain that my ancestors were in the mountains of Czechloslovakia when their ancestors were slaves, and their assumption that due to my beind white that my ancestors had anything to do with this event is ignorant. Truthfully, I have had black friends who would tell these individuals they were ignorant as well.

I didn't feel like reading the entire thread or all of the crap on it. Just wanted to state me case where it could be seen.

::shakes head::

well said brother.... i call you brother because im half Czechloslovakian, my mother is.

Czechloslovakia is a stong country

were do you think the word slave comes from SLOV-SLOVIC

 

[Dial_tone]

I demand reparations just for reading nubly's thread.

 

[Deleted member 33117]

Cool, I'm half Czech also, but think of it as my ethnicity. My mother is a mitxute of german, dutch, english etc. Mostly imagrants in the last century though.

 

[The Wenis]

I demand reparations just for reading nubly's thread.

lol

 

[juiceddreadlocks]

dial tone : i hate this stereotype, i really do. having said that. you played a college sport in the south (roudabouts where i am) and you saw a lot of what nubly was talking about in his thread, correct?

that is really hard to ignore, but possible. before i pledged that majority of my friends were black (football team)

on the same token, how many annoying ass 5'7'' white boys with lifted z71's were there that were noisier and more arrogant/self righteous that most anyone?

 

[Smurfy]

who is this nubly anyway. i cant even begin to drum up a reply to any of his ridiculous threads. just hit him with red. shouldnt he be banned by now??

 

[Dial_tone]

dial tone : i hate this stereotype, i really do. having said that. you played a college sport in the south (roudabouts where i am) and you saw a lot of what nubly was talking about in his thread, correct?

that is really hard to ignore, but possible. before i pledged that majority of my friends were black (football team)

on the same token, how many annoying ass 5'7'' white boys with lifted z71's were there that were noisier and more arrogant/self righteous that most anyone?

As I said before my objection was to the inference that one guy thinks for the entire black population.

 

[juiceddreadlocks]

As I said before my objection was to the inference that one guy thinks for the entire black population.

i was agreeing, orb!

 

[Gambino]

All I can say is wow. I know many intelligent and educated black people who do not feel that anyone owes them anything.

Personally the RARE individual who thinks I do, I just explain that my ancestors were in the mountains of Czechloslovakia when their ancestors were slaves, and their assumption that due to my beind white that my ancestors had anything to do with this event is ignorant. Truthfully, I have had black friends who would tell these individuals they were ignorant as well.

I didn't feel like reading the entire thread or all of the crap on it. Just wanted to state me case where it could be seen.

::shakes head::

sorry to wreck your good time, but your fun loving white relatives came to America and indirectly benefited from slavery...it really does not matter if they actually had slaves...they benefited by being white.

 

[Deleted member 33117]

sorry to wreck your good time, but your fun loving white relatives came to America and indirectly benefited from slavery...it really does not matter if they actually had slaves...they benefited by being white.

Uh huh... sure they did. They burned a cross in my greatgrandfathers front yard. Oh... did people forget that the Klan hated white catholic imagrants as well?

 

[Buddy_Christ]

who is this nubly anyway. i cant even begin to drum up a reply to any of his ridiculous threads. just hit him with red. shouldnt he be banned by now??

i asked digger earlier for the power to deliver just one digger sized karma hit.

i don't think i'm going to get my wish.

 

[Gambino]

Uh huh... sure they did. They burned a cross in my greatgrandfathers front yard. Oh... did people forget that the Klan hated white catholic imagrants as well?

don't give me that shit dude, my family is catholic as well...their was catholic discrimination, but near the level as black discrimination...Slavery was a institution, along with Jim Crow...your ancestors did not have to drink out of catholic only fountains, etc...

...truth is, white immigrants came here and benefited from the institution of slavery...hence jewish, italian, irish, etc, climbing out of the ghetto immigrant ghetto while the black the race has stayed there more consistantly...

once again, sorry to wreck your feel-good time...

 

[SoKlueles]

whos nubly?

 

[Ulcasterdropout]

I'm sure Romans, Mongols, Huns, Goths, and God knows who else, had Czechoslovakian slaves at one time.....I hear the sex slave trade is still going strong there now..

 

[BO-DEN]

I'm sure Romans, Mongals, Huns, Goths, and God knows who else, had Czechoslovakian slaves at one time.....I hear the sex slave trade is still going strong there now..

Czechloslovakia is a stong country
were do you think the word slave comes from SLOV-SLOVIC

you said it

BO-DEN

 

[digger]

Gambino - Back in the 1860's we had something called the Civil War, during which my ancestors risked their lives fighting to put a stop to slavery. I don't think I should get any particular credit for that, but I'm not about to accept any blame either.

 

[Gambino]

Gambino - Back in the 1860's we had something called the Civil War, during which my ancestors risked their lives fighting to put a stop to slavery. I don't think I should get any particular credit for that, but I'm not about to accept any blame either.

I understand...but an inevitable side effect of the system, after and during slavery, gave the white man a huge economic and political advantage...this has lead to white dominance in bussiness and politics...which in turn allowed white money to stay white money well into the 21st century...

 

[jerseyart]

There is truth on both sides of the argument. Frankly a far stronger case could be made by pointing to the more recent history of segregation, where many of the victims still survive, and the effect on newer generations are still felt.

Bottom line in my opinion I think we need to come to the conclusion that for whatever reasons, which strike me as less important and more contentious than most, there are disproportionate problems in the African American community which appear persistent and unlikely to be self resolving. With that in mind some form of aid/redress is warranted. It's an unhealthy long term condition for our society as a whole, and we would all ultimately benefit from any improvement. The fact that it may be historically justified strikes me as less meaningful than the fact that human beings are suffering within our borders.

Digger is also correct, and his statements should not be casually dismissed by those in the black community. My family only recently came to this country, and I am in fact first generation, so what follows is not a form of self aggrandizement.

The ancestors of those living in this country, who formed our nation, did not invent slavery. It is an institution that had existed for thousands of years, and was in fact foisted upon this nation prior to its founding. Yet although they did not begin the institution, they were in fact among the first to do away with it. The same white christian males who are so routinely pointed to as the boogeyman for all of societeis ills are also the same people who first recognized the horrific reality of enslaving other humans, and following through on those convictions.

 

[Ulcasterdropout]

With that in mind some form of aid/redress is warranted.

That is a great idea....You should start right away! Thanks.

 

[jerseyart]

That is a great idea....You should start right away! Thanks.

Well...uh...I'm a little light at the moment.

No sweat though, GL told me he would cover my part.

 

[digger]

I understand...but an inevitable side effect of the system, after and during slavery, gave the white man a huge economic and political advantage...this has lead to white dominance in bussiness and politics...which in turn allowed white money to stay white money well into the 21st century...

Which white men? The Northerners in the Triangle Trade ("Molasses to Rum to Slaves")? The Southern plantation owners, maybe 3% of the population? Huge economic advantage? They thought so, but in retrospect their failure to industrialize held them (and the rest of the country) back by about eighty years... and guaranteed they lost the war. Look at how things boomed between 1880 and 1900 after that nonsense was swept away. Coincidence? I don't think so.

My folks have been in the USA so long I have no idea where we came from originally. I do know we're not Old Northern Money and we were never plantation owners -- just working stiffs who may have been COMPETING with slave labor some of the time (but not often). We would have been better off if there had never been African slavery.

 

[ChefWide]

Which We would have been better off if there had never been African slavery.

Solid as a rock.

 

[bluepeter]

The ancestors of those living in this country, who formed our nation, did not invent slavery. It is an institution that had existed for thousands of years, and was in fact foisted upon this nation prior to its founding. Yet although they did not begin the institution, they were in fact among the first to do away with it. The same white christian males who are so routinely pointed to as the boogeyman for all of societeis ills are also the same people who first recognized the horrific reality of enslaving other humans, and following through on those convictions.

OK, they didn't invent slavery, that is obvious but slavery was foisted on your nation? BULLSHIT.

 

[jerseyart]

OK, they didn't invent slavery, that is obvious but slavery was foisted on your nation? BULLSHIT.

No. it's a matter of historical record. The British introduced slavery to the colonies for economic gain and advantage.

You will no doubt respond that we could have done away with the institution at the inception, and I would point you to the historical record of that time.

I think what many fail to recognize is that even as the Constitution was being drawn, many recognized that slavery was evil. One of the first, if not the first, bills which was introduced in the First Congress under the new Constitution was one sponsored by Pennsylvania (predominantly Quakers I think) which would have effectively closed the door on future slavery in this country. The nation almost died that day.

By the time we got around to fighting the British slavery had already become an economic reality and necessity (at least perceived, if not in fact one) in the South. Southerners also had large financial investments in slaves. Moreover any serious discussion of ending slavery had to address what was to be done with the slaves. If they weren't slaves, they would be free. The idea of living side by side with a million freed blacks was more frightening to most than perhaps the reality of losing whatever perceived economic advantage was gained by slavery.

It is easy in retrospect to criticize the "ignoraance" of such an attitude, but we are viewing it from a time where mulitcultural diversity is the norm. Till that point no one had successfully mastered the task of living peacably next to a free race so clearly distinct from ones own in all of human history.

 

[bluepeter]

No. it's a matter of historical record. The British introduced slavery to the colonies for economic gain and advantage.

You will no doubt respond that we could have done away with the institution at the inception, and I would point you to the historical record of that time.

I think what many fail to recognize is that even as the Constitution was being drawn, many recognized that slavery was evil. One of the first, if not the first, bills which was introduced in the First Congress under the new Constitution was one sponsored by Pennsylvania (predominantly Quakers I think) which would have effectively closed the door on future slavery in this country. The nation almost died that day.

By the time we got around to fighting the British slavery had already become an economic reality and necessity (at least perceived, if not in fact one) in the South. Southerners also had large financial investments in slaves. Moreover any serious discussion of ending slavery had to address what was to be done with the slaves. If they weren't slaves, they would be free. The idea of living side by side with a million freed blacks was more frightening to most than perhaps the reality of losing whatever perceived economic advantage was gained by slavery.

It is easy in retrospect to criticize the "ignoraance" of such an attitude, but we are viewing it from a time where mulitcultural diversity is the norm. Till that point no one had successfully mastered the task of living peacably next to a free race so clearly distinct from ones own in all of human history.

If by the British introducing slavery you mean that those Americans who did so were originally from Britain, then I guess you are correct. The British imported indentured servitude to the colonies, not slavery. Indentured servants that came to America initially were not solely black and indentured servitude had nothing to do with race. They usually had a 7 year 'contract' after which they were freed and allowed to assume a regular position in society. They were not 'slaves for life' nor were their children simply because of their skin colour. Slavery came about because of the need for cheap (i.e. free) labour in the colonies and the flourishing African slave trade of the time. So your assertion that slavery was 'foisted' on America is patently ridiculous.

 

[jerseyart]

If by the British introducing slavery you mean that those Americans who did so were originally from Britain, then I guess you are correct. The British imported indentured servitude to the colonies, not slavery. Indentured servants that came to America initially were not solely black and indentured servitude had nothing to do with race. They usually had a 7 year 'contract' after which they were freed and allowed to assume a regular position in society. They were not 'slaves for life' nor were their children simply because of their skin colour. Slavery came about because of the need for cheap (i.e. free) labour in the colonies and the flourishing African slave trade of the time. So your assertion that slavery was 'foisted' on America is patently ridiculous.

Your history is spotty. I believe you are accurate that slavery did begin as indentured servitude. But I don't think that lasted more than 20-30 years. By the 16770-1680's the British were the largest trafficker of slaves in the world. The slaves themselves were referred to as black gold, and the British used the institution to work their colonial plantation system all throughout the world, not just in the Americas. I think even the king received profits from the "Royal African Company"

 

[bluepeter]

Your history is spotty. I believe you are accurate that slavery did begin as indentured servitude. But I don't think that lasted more than 20-30 years. By the 16770-1680's the British were the largest trafficker of slaves in the world. The slaves themselves were referred to as black gold, and the British used the institution to work their colonial plantation system all throughout the world, not just in the Americas. I think even the king received profits from the "Royal African Company"

Actually my history is 'spot on'. We're not really disagreeing here, I just took exception to the statement that slavery was 'foisted' on America because that is bullshit. Also, your comment that the British used the institution of slavery in their colonies throughout the world is accurate but their is still a major difference. Only in America did that institution go as far as it did in terms of it being a race issue and it being for life and passed onto your children etc.

 

[jerseyart]

Bluepeter

Considering that the practice and entire plantation system was based on standard English models of the time, I don't think foisted is too strong a term. Certainly it was at minimum introduced by the British.

America was somewhat unique in no small measure because aside from the pushed aside or murdered off indians, it was uninhabited. Other colonies already had large native populations whcih more or less negated any opportunity to form an "all white Christian" enclave. It may seem like a minor point, but it goes back to what was discussed earlier, namely what to do with freed slaves?

Either they stay in bondage, or they are let go. No where did free mixed races of such distinction ever live side by side. The very thought was frighteneing to many, and without historical precedent. Thus the "for life" and "subsequent generations"

 

[MissJanet79]

I demand reparations just for reading nubly's thread.

You must spread some Karma around before giving it to Dial_tone again.

DAMN!

 

[Gambino]

Which white men? The Northerners in the Triangle Trade ("Molasses to Rum to Slaves")? The Southern plantation owners, maybe 3% of the population? Huge economic advantage? They thought so, but in retrospect their failure to industrialize held them (and the rest of the country) back by about eighty years... and guaranteed they lost the war. Look at how things boomed between 1880 and 1900 after that nonsense was swept away. Coincidence? I don't think so.

My folks have been in the USA so long I have no idea where we came from originally. I do know we're not Old Northern Money and we were never plantation owners -- just working stiffs who may have been COMPETING with slave labor some of the time (but not often). We would have been better off if there had never been African slavery.

I hear your side digger, and I agree completely. What I am saying, though, is that white boys indirectly benefited by the system slavery installed...sometimes considered the good ol' boy system. For example, is it any concidence that the majority of Fortune 500 companies have white CEO's? Or a disspropornitate (sp) amount of white shareholders? Simply put, when your "people" have been dominating a sector of business for over a century, they will most likely give the job to you as opposed to someone of a different "people." I'm sure you realise this...

One last example...black Johnny and white Jimmy apply for a white collar job in 1920 Manhattan. Both have equal college educations (rare for even northern black folks at the time) and intellect...but Jimmy gets the job, cause he knows the boss from the white neigberhood they share, or the white country club they both belong to. Therefore, Jimmy prospers, along with his kids and their kids, etc...meanwhile Johnny didn't have the connections, so he made less and had less to offer his family.

Digger, please give me green for owing the shiat outta you...