|
|
Post by thecitizen on Jun 14, 2021 17:21:01 GMT
Never said it was right. Can you think of anything today that is legal that should be illegal. In the future when it is illegal should we jail you for using it in the last. Or how about many pesticides that are banned in Europe. But people all over the states dump those brutally harmful chemicals on their lawns and gardens and farms. Your morally superiority complex is what is laughable wads. Don't try to change the subject to the legality of slavery. The point I made that you cannot refute that is without slavery, this country would not exist as it does today. PERIOD! |
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 25,971
|
Post by petep on Jun 14, 2021 17:37:08 GMT
If slavery were not a practice, the US would exist as it is today. a tiny percentage of the white and black people of this country, in a specific geography. growing a few specific crops used slaves, the legal and accepted practice (albeit wrong, whether we are talking about black on black slavery, the barabry coast blacks owning white slaves, egypts slave history etc)....if slaves were not available or allowed, they would have used other resources, like any other industry does. My guess is if you were hungry and wanted pizza, and the pizza place was closed, you'd go hungry vs just calling a place that is open for business. It's called substitutes in economics. you should read up on what happened when slavery ended...guess what, the land was still worked, under different arrangements.. www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/reconstruction-sharecropping-and-changes-southern-economy/ |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2021 17:37:45 GMT
I am having a hard time seeing capitalism (a system of economy that arose in the 17th century) as a cause of slavery, considering that slavery is ancient and capitalist economies are relatively recent.
Slavery was a better fit with the ancien regime/monarchy/blood & soil world that dominated the planet in pre-history and that gave way to market economies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2021 17:40:35 GMT
If slavery were not a practice, the US would exist as it is today. Oooh that's a rather indefensible point. The past informs the present. It leaves a mark. If we were to change the systems of laws we live under in a radical way such that some group of people no longer had rights, it would change them, us, and our shared future. |
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 25,971
|
Post by petep on Jun 14, 2021 17:46:09 GMT
I am having a hard time seeing capitalism (a system of economy that arose in the 17th century) as a cause of slavery, considering that slavery is ancient and capitalist economies are relatively recent. Slavery was a better fit with the ancien regime/monarchy/blood & soil world that dominated the planet in pre-history and that gave way to market economies. Excellent point TL. I don't think many understand slavery has existed for eons, and is far more indicative of a form of control or power, often used to get jobs done (pyramid), barbary coast for arab slave trade... www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Barbary-Pirates-English-Slaves/Sadly here in the states, slavery is taught in the context of it never happened before the US and the teachers try to weave a fake narrative that slavery was the fuel for, and tied at the hip, with US capitalism... It's odd that so many readily accept the use of brutal chemical pesticides and herbicides, which are allowed via close ties between big chem/seed companies like bayer and monsanto, and big gov't...these things are literally killing and destroying so much of our ecosystem, and people's health....and its happening and these same people that wax on about slavery say nothing about whats happening under their watch... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2021 19:26:05 GMT
Never said it was right. Can you think of anything today that is legal that should be illegal. In the future when it is illegal should we jail you for using it in the last. Or how about many pesticides that are banned in Europe. But people all over the states dump those brutally harmful chemicals on their lawns and gardens and farms. Your morally superiority complex is what is laughable wads. Don't try to change the subject to the legality of slavery. The point I made that you cannot refute that is without slavery, this country would not exist as it does today. PERIOD! Would the country be different today? Of course it would, in both positive and negative ways. If no slaves had been brought to North America (only 388,000 out of millions came to North America anyway), there would have been a corresponding earlier increase in European immigrants to fill many needs in both the North and South. We likely would have grown into an innovative superpower during the Industrial Revolution as a matter of necessity, with perhaps more and earlier industrial development in the South.
Rich people tend to find other ways to get and stay rich when a situation changes. Northern shipping magnates who made their fortunes in slave trading would have likely found other cargo and Southern elites would have sought early technical innovations and other labor options to bring in and process their products. Think of Egypt and India filling the gap of lost Southern cotton in the early 1860s.
The Founding of the country would have been unchanged, but the subsequent reverence for the ideals of that founding would have lasted longer, although Clay and his American System plus the Yankee love of protective tariffs likely would have eventually caused a rift between regions.
Blacks after 1865 made little or no difference in the subsequent rise of the American industry and economy.
Do you agree that it would have been better if no black slaves were ever brought to North America?
|
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Jun 14, 2021 19:58:17 GMT
Don't try to change the subject to the legality of slavery. The point I made that you cannot refute that is without slavery, this country would not exist as it does today. PERIOD! Would the country be different today? Of course it would, in both positive and negative ways. If no slaves had been brought to North America (only 388,000 out of millions came to North America anyway), there would have been a corresponding earlier increase in European immigrants to fill many needs in both the North and South. We likely would have grown into an innovative superpower during the Industrial Revolution as a matter of necessity, with perhaps more and earlier industrial development in the South.
Rich people tend to find other ways to get and stay rich when a situation changes. Northern shipping magnates who made their fortunes in slave trading would have likely found other cargo and Southern elites would have sought early technical innovations and other labor options to bring in and process their products. Think of Egypt and India filling the gap of lost Southern cotton in the early 1860s.
The Founding of the country would have been unchanged, but the subsequent reverence for the ideals of that founding would have lasted longer, although Clay and his American System plus the Yankee love of protective tariffs likely would have eventually caused a rift between regions.
Blacks after 1865 made little or no difference in the subsequent rise of the American industry and economy.
You have no clue, do you. It does not matter how many slaves were brought over by the middle passage. Chattel slavery took care of that. In most southern plantation states, there were more slaves than free white people. Chattel slavery ran the economy of the south. People became very wealthy from slavery. Without slavery, there would have been no wealth. Just a bunch of poor farmers making it the best way they could. There would not have been a rise of the American industrial revolution without the wealth of sourness slavery |
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 25,971
|
Post by petep on Jun 14, 2021 20:03:51 GMT
Its funny how we are witnessing the radical left dems pushing to raise the min labor, and you have business leaders on camera saying well, we will invest heavier in automation, hire fewer workers...its a simple economic choice...
perhaps without slavery, as was pointed out earlier, someone would invented the cotton gin before 1794. Slavery may have slowed progress, just as lower min wages does not incent people to invent more efficient ways of replacing labor.
Arguably, the brilliance of republican lincoln, taking on and fighting southern democrats to end the horrible slavery the southern white and black democrats were engaged in, ushered in many great technical advances like the cotton gin that helped the southern democrats...
|
|
|
|
Post by Fiddler on Jun 14, 2021 20:12:46 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2021 20:13:25 GMT
Would the country be different today? Of course it would, in both positive and negative ways. If no slaves had been brought to North America (only 388,000 out of millions came to North America anyway), there would have been a corresponding earlier increase in European immigrants to fill many needs in both the North and South. We likely would have grown into an innovative superpower during the Industrial Revolution as a matter of necessity, with perhaps more and earlier industrial development in the South.
Rich people tend to find other ways to get and stay rich when a situation changes. Northern shipping magnates who made their fortunes in slave trading would have likely found other cargo and Southern elites would have sought early technical innovations and other labor options to bring in and process their products. Think of Egypt and India filling the gap of lost Southern cotton in the early 1860s.
The Founding of the country would have been unchanged, but the subsequent reverence for the ideals of that founding would have lasted longer, although Clay and his American System plus the Yankee love of protective tariffs likely would have eventually caused a rift between regions.
Blacks after 1865 made little or no difference in the subsequent rise of the American industry and economy.
You have no clue, do you. It does not matter how many slaves were brought over by the middle passage. Chattel slavery took care of that. In most southern plantation states, there were more slaves than free white people. Chattel slavery ran the economy of the south. People became very wealthy from slavery. Without slavery, there would have been no wealth. Just a bunch of poor farmers making it the best way they could. There would not have been a rise of the American industrial revolution without the wealth of sourness slavery You're stupidly biased in favor of that moronic 1619 fiction, aren't you? The industrial revolution took off without slaves, remember? Most of the industrial interests in the 19th century got none of their wealth from slavery; most were what we would now call "start-ups", unrelated to slave labor profits. If there had been no slaves, the South would have been just fine, adapting to the labor at hand.
Think about how many states have prospered in this nation that never had any significant black population at all and still don't. That's why Northern states were the first to bring out Black Codes on which Jim Crow was modeled. |
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Jun 14, 2021 20:23:35 GMT
You also wrote this in a post. I’m not taking this out of context. You said there was “no fraud. Full stop.” Note the “full stop”. What does “full stop” mean to you when said or written after a very specific assertion?  because I had already stated: Further, there has been ZERO evidence of any fraud or bad actions beyond the typical low-level churn in any election. It isn't rocket science. Notice "ZERO" along with "beyond the typical low-level churn in any election", meaning fraud on a level that would have any impact on the outcome of the election, not some dipshit Trump supporter writing in "Trump" for his mentally impaired grandmother. Is that really all you have? Nitpicking about semantics and capitalization? . Saying there was “no fraud. Full stop.” is not accurate. Because you said something which contradicts that earlier isn’t my problem. It’s an untrue statement. Making a more accurate statement earlier doesn’t negate that your later statement is absolutely false. Making an accurate statement, to nobody’s surprise, doesn’t give cover to making false statements later. |
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Jun 14, 2021 21:42:39 GMT
You have no clue, do you. It does not matter how many slaves were brought over by the middle passage. Chattel slavery took care of that. In most southern plantation states, there were more slaves than free white people. Chattel slavery ran the economy of the south. People became very wealthy from slavery. Without slavery, there would have been no wealth. Just a bunch of poor farmers making it the best way they could. There would not have been a rise of the American industrial revolution without the wealth of sourness slavery You're stupidly biased in favor of that moronic 1619 fiction, aren't you? The industrial revolution took off without slaves, remember? Most of the industrial interests in the 19th century got none of their wealth from slavery; most were what we would now call "start-ups", unrelated to slave labor profits. If there had been no slaves, the South would have been just fine, adapting to the labor at hand.
Think about how many states have prospered in this nation that never had any significant black population at all and still don't. That's why Northern states were the first to bring out Black Codes on which Jim Crow was modeled. You really need to read the 1618 project so that you can really understand how wealth was made in this country |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2021 0:01:34 GMT
You're stupidly biased in favor of that moronic 1619 fiction, aren't you? The industrial revolution took off without slaves, remember? Most of the industrial interests in the 19th century got none of their wealth from slavery; most were what we would now call "start-ups", unrelated to slave labor profits. If there had been no slaves, the South would have been just fine, adapting to the labor at hand.
Think about how many states have prospered in this nation that never had any significant black population at all and still don't. That's why Northern states were the first to bring out Black Codes on which Jim Crow was modeled. You really need to read the 1618 project so that you can really understand how wealth was made in this country It's the 1619 project, not 1618. And both its premise and its contents are fecal laced garbage that even Joseph Goebbels, master of propaganda would have been ashamed to have peddled.
Wealth was made IN SPITE OF SLAVERY, not because of it, unless you can explain why so many countries succeeded financially without a single slave's contribution. Slave labor actually depressed wealth creation among non slave holders in the areas where slavery was prevalent, offsetting this NYT fiction.
|
|
|
|
Post by VYPR on Jun 15, 2021 2:22:53 GMT
because I had already stated: Further, there has been ZERO evidence of any fraud or bad actions beyond the typical low-level churn in any election. It isn't rocket science. Notice "ZERO" along with "beyond the typical low-level churn in any election", meaning fraud on a level that would have any impact on the outcome of the election, not some dipshit Trump supporter writing in "Trump" for his mentally impaired grandmother. Is that really all you have? Nitpicking about semantics and capitalization? . Saying there was “no fraud. Full stop.” is not accurate. Because you said something which contradicts that earlier isn’t my problem. It’s an untrue statement. Making a more accurate statement earlier doesn’t negate that your later statement is absolutely false. Making an accurate statement, to nobody’s surprise, doesn’t give cover to making false statements later. LOL! Is this all you have? Bullshit about whether what I said 6 posts ago is able to semantically co-exist with what I said 3 posts later? Complaints about CAPS? All you need is some bitching about spelling and you have the trifecta. You lost this one. Next time, don't be so obvious in your sympathy for and apologizing for a group that wants to overthrow a free and fair election and is pumping out lies and misinformation to delude their followers. There was no election fraud. There is ZERO (omg, caps!) reason to keep claiming the election was stolen, as the Trump-GOP is doing. They are lying. Full stop. (you seem to love the semantic possibilities of that phrase so I dropped it again for you). Hard to come to any other conclusion but that you are sympathetic to their actions. . |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,101
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 15, 2021 5:32:56 GMT
You're stupidly biased in favor of that moronic 1619 fiction, aren't you? The industrial revolution took off without slaves, remember? Most of the industrial interests in the 19th century got none of their wealth from slavery; most were what we would now call "start-ups", unrelated to slave labor profits. If there had been no slaves, the South would have been just fine, adapting to the labor at hand.
Think about how many states have prospered in this nation that never had any significant black population at all and still don't. That's why Northern states were the first to bring out Black Codes on which Jim Crow was modeled. You really need to read the 1618 project so that you can really understand how wealth was made in this country
I haven't read that work. But I'm currently reading an excellent biography of Thomas Jefferson. He had a variable public view about slavery, but his wealth and societal position depended upon slavery.
At the same time, it's evident that it was not just the South that profited from slavery. The North also made good profits from providing the transport infrastructure to bring slaves to America from Africa, and then using the same ships to ferry American goods and raw materials back to the east, as well as carry sugar and related products from the West Indies. Of course slavery was morally wrong but ... money talks ...
|
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Jun 15, 2021 9:18:11 GMT
Saying there was “no fraud. Full stop.” is not accurate. Because you said something which contradicts that earlier isn’t my problem. It’s an untrue statement. Making a more accurate statement earlier doesn’t negate that your later statement is absolutely false. Making an accurate statement, to nobody’s surprise, doesn’t give cover to making false statements later. LOL! Is this all you have? Bullshit about whether what I said 6 posts ago is able to semantically co-exist with what I said 3 posts later? Complaints about CAPS? All you need is some bitching about spelling and you have the trifecta. You lost this one. Next time, don't be so obvious in your sympathy for and apologizing for a group that wants to overthrow a free and fair election and is pumping out lies and misinformation to delude their followers. There was no election fraud. There is ZERO (omg, caps!) reason to keep claiming the election was stolen, as the Trump-GOP is doing. They are lying. Full stop. (you seem to love the semantic possibilities of that phrase so I dropped it again for you). Hard to come to any other conclusion but that you are sympathetic to their actions. . *Screeching Intensifies* If you don’t want to be called on untrue statements, and will incessantly screech about it for days, then don’t make untrue statements. I don’t see how this is my problem, or how screeching gives you some sort of victory, despite your objectively and admittedly untrue statements. And then you keep making the untrue statement within your screeching? Get a grip. |
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Jun 15, 2021 12:59:45 GMT
You really need to read the 1618 project so that you can really understand how wealth was made in this country It's the 1619 project, not 1618. And both its premise and its contents are fecal laced garbage that even Joseph Goebbels, master of propaganda would have been ashamed to have peddled.
Wealth was made IN SPITE OF SLAVERY, not because of it, unless you can explain why so many countries succeeded financially without a single slave's contribution. Slave labor actually depressed wealth creation among non slave holders in the areas where slavery was prevalent, offsetting this NYT fiction.
Wealth was made because of slavery. Any fool can see that. |
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Jun 15, 2021 13:03:13 GMT
You really need to read the 1618 project so that you can really understand how wealth was made in this country
I haven't read that work. But I'm currently reading an excellent biography of Thomas Jefferson. He had a variable public view about slavery, but his wealth and societal position depended upon slavery.
At the same time, it's evident that it was not just the South that profited from slavery. The North also made good profits from providing the transport infrastructure to bring slaves to America from Africa, and then using the same ships to ferry American goods and raw materials back to the east, as well as carry sugar and related products from the West Indies. Of course slavery was morally wrong but ... money talks ...
Also, the milling industries in the North depended on the harvesting on raw materials in the south. It is all connected. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,101
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 15, 2021 13:13:16 GMT
I haven't read that work. But I'm currently reading an excellent biography of Thomas Jefferson. He had a variable public view about slavery, but his wealth and societal position depended upon slavery.
At the same time, it's evident that it was not just the South that profited from slavery. The North also made good profits from providing the transport infrastructure to bring slaves to America from Africa, and then using the same ships to ferry American goods and raw materials back to the east, as well as carry sugar and related products from the West Indies. Of course slavery was morally wrong but ... money talks ...
Also, the milling industries in the North depended on the harvesting on raw materials in the south. It is all connected.
Plus, the North's milling industries were in competition with British milling industry. If I'm not mistaken, this led Britain to lean towards supporting the Confederacy, with the South attempting to redirect its raw materials to Europe. Fortunately the North's naval capability tended to thwart this move, although some may have gotten through. But there's no doubt that prior to the outbreak of hostilities between North and South, both benefited economically from slavery.
|
|
|
|
Post by VYPR on Jun 15, 2021 13:35:14 GMT
LOL! Is this all you have? Bullshit about whether what I said 6 posts ago is able to semantically co-exist with what I said 3 posts later? Complaints about CAPS? All you need is some bitching about spelling and you have the trifecta. You lost this one. Next time, don't be so obvious in your sympathy for and apologizing for a group that wants to overthrow a free and fair election and is pumping out lies and misinformation to delude their followers. There was no election fraud. There is ZERO (omg, caps!) reason to keep claiming the election was stolen, as the Trump-GOP is doing. They are lying. Full stop. (you seem to love the semantic possibilities of that phrase so I dropped it again for you). Hard to come to any other conclusion but that you are sympathetic to their actions. . *Screeching Intensifies* If you don’t want to be called on untrue statements, and will incessantly screech about it for days, then don’t make untrue statements. I don’t see how this is my problem, or how screeching gives you some sort of victory, despite your objectively and admittedly untrue statements. And then you keep making the untrue statement within your screeching? Get a grip. You can tell you have nothing whatsoever to argue your ridiculous position by the lengths you go to exit the argument using any means possible. Do run along. Don't let the door hit you on the ass. Next time try harder and think about your nonsense before you spew it. . |
|
