My guess is, the laws that regulated blacks selling other blacks into slavery, were regulated by the sellers.
Why doesn't anyone ever mention WHITE slaves?
- Thread starter Barbella
- Start date
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
Yeah, only 600,000+ in one section of Africa alone. Rare. And besides, it's just black people and there are no political points to be made of it.
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
Translation: It's whitey's fault Margaret Sanger was a racist pig! Honest!
D
Deleted member 21794
Guest
The same way you went from being a white woman from "norcal" (wink wink) to being a black woman from southern California perhaps?
Arkady
President
No. What, specifically, did you misread to suggest I was?
Arkady
President
Incorrect.
C
Capitalist
Guest
Specifically your entire properly read previous post. Is that specific enough or do you want me to pick out the pixels in the letters that make up your previous post?
The same way you went from being Stan H. to The Thinker. Is that right?
Arkady
President
No, obviously that isn't specific enough. What, specifically, in what I wrote, led you that badly astray?
Charcat
One of the Patsy's
How in the hell would YOU know who Stan H. is? LOLThe same way you went from being Stan H. to The Thinker. Is that right?
Making up more stories about me, I see.You know a lot for a woman who doesn't read.
Being phony is not just your second nature. It's you.
I have friends who keep me informed.
Charcat
One of the Patsy's
I'm sure you do....I have friends who keep me informed.
The Sage of Main Street
Governor
Heed or BleedWow! Weren't they lucky?
Just like cats and dogs who would have led a kill-or-be-killed life if not adopted by a superior species.
The Sage of Main Street
Governor
They're Not Red, They're Blueblood
How can he be a Communist when he doesn't believe that the 19th Century American working class had it worse than the slaves? Jack London certainly did.
C
Capitalist
Guest
What happened that made you turn over said leaf?
EatTheRich
President
To you having the same options a man might have is a matter of "convenience."
EatTheRich
President
London was an opportunist compromiser. Here's what W.E.B. DuBois, a founder of the CPUSA, had to say about it:
What did it mean to be a slave? It is hard to imagine it today. We think of oppression beyond all conception: cruelty, degradation, whipping and starvation, the absolute negation of human rights; or on the contrary, we may think of the ordinary worker the world over today, slaving ten, twelve, or fourteen hours a day, with not enough to eat, compelled by his physical necessities to do this and not to do that, curtailed in his movements and his possibilities; and we say, here, too, is a slave called a "free worker," and slavery is merely a matter of name.
But there was in 1863 a real meaning to slavery different from that we may apply to the laborer today. It was in part psychological, the enforced personal feeling of inferiority, the calling of another Master; the standing with hat in hand. It was the helplessness. It was the defenselessness of family life. It was the submergence below the arbitrary will of any sort of individual. It was without doubt worse in these vital respects than that which exists today in Europe or America....
The slavery of Negroes in the South was not usually a deliberately cruel and oppressive system. It did not mean systematic starvation or murder. On the other hand, it is just as difficult to conceive as quite true the idyllic picture of a patriarchal state with cultured and humane masters under whom slaves were as children, guided and trained in work and play, given even such mental training as was for their good, and for the well-being of the surrounding world.
The victims of Southern slavery were often happy; had usually adequate food for their health, and shelter sufficient for a mild climate. The Southerners could say with some justification that when the mass of their field hands were compared with the worst class of laborers in the slums of New York and Philadelphia, and the factory towns of New England, the black slaves were as well off and in some particulars better off. Slaves lived largely in the country where health conditions were better; they worked in the open air, and their hours were about the current hours for peasants throughout Europe. They received no formal education, and neither did the Irish peasant, the English factory-laborer, nor the German Bauer; and in contrast with these free white laborers, the Negroes were protected by a certain primitive sort of old-age pension, job insurance, and sickness insurance; that is, they must be supported in some fashion, when they were too old to work; they must have attention in sickness, for they represented invested capital; and they could never be among the unemployed.
On the other hand, it is just as true that Negro slaves in America represented the worst and lowest conditions among modern laborers.... They represented in a very real sense the ultimate degradation of man. Indeed, the system was so reactionary, so utterly inconsistent with modern progress, that we simply cannot grasp it today. No matter how degraded the factory hand, he is not real estate. The tragedy of the black slave's position was precisely this; his absolute subjection to the individual will of an owner and to "the cruelty and injustice which are the invariable consequences of the exercise of irresponsible power, especially where authority must be sometimes delegated by the planter to agents of inferior education and coarser feelings."[1]
