Black Slave Owners in the United States

[DadSmith]

Professor of what? ‘Cause I wager it isn’t statics or logic.

And here’s a flaw in your logic. We’ve been hearing people say that since they didn’t own slaves or participate in the trade, then they shouldnt have to pay reparations. Shouldn’t that apply to the tribes, as well?

You’re killing your own argument.

When these tribes pay up, and then the British. We will try to track down America's who's ancestors owned or sold slaves and have them pay reparations to people who can prove that they are indeed descendants of slaves.
Now how much money and how many thousands of people should the government hire to get all this straighted out?
Or do you feel like a tax on all white people to be paid to all black people in the United States legally and illegally?

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Double post.

 

[kickbacked]

Lol well I took vacation and started a new job so obviously either I’m wrong or you are. But you educate professors so I’m sure you’ll tell me more about myself than I know.

Havent missed a day yet.

 

[DadSmith]

I still have some back-reading to do in this thread, but there are some things I can say about what I've seen so far. The whole line of discussion about it's your math vs my professor, c'mon. The body of written literature about the subject is all over the place. If it's the fact that it's a professor that has rendered your erection then will any professor do? I mean the other side can go peddle their experts too. I kinda think this discussion isn't going to go anywhere close to a resolution, not that many do.

I've ask them to provide proof they don't so I guess they have none since they give none.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

View attachment 137667
Havent missed a day yet.

I haven’t? You’ll need more than a post from exactly a month ago as evidence of not taking a couple weeks away.

Thanks for proving you’d attempt to prove you know more about me than I do tho. Predictable.

Also, not sure what this even has to do with the topic, it must make you feel like you can actually score a point... but nope.

 

[buckwacker]

It's pretty obvious that you were being sarcastic and don't really believe that anyone should be indebted to paying reparations for the actions of the past. I understood your point about those who are pushing for reparations should start with the descendants of African slave traders first.

I think it was obvious even to those who pretend to think it wasn't.

 

[JCSR]

I think it was obvious even to those who pretend to think it wasn't.

You need to understand there are people here that lack a sense of humor.

 

[kickbacked]

I haven’t? You’ll need more than a post from exactly a month ago as evidence of not taking a couple weeks away.

Thanks for proving you’d attempt to prove you know more about me than I do tho. Predictable.

Also, not sure what this even has to do with the topic, it must make you feel like you can actually score a point... but nope.

You claimed to be a BS denier. I simply asked if you believe your own BS. That post a month ago is evidence where you say you arent going to post anymore. You posted again on that same page. I dont know more about you than you do, ive just learned not to trust what you say.

 

[BugI02]

Can the people caught up in a circling dogfight actually see beyond the tail of the enemy they're trying to turn inside of?

Maybe you should check your six

 

[Hatin Since 87]

You claimed to be a BS denier. I simply asked if you believe your own BS. That post a month ago is evidence where you say you arent going to post anymore. You posted again on that same page. I dont know more about you than you do, ive just learned not to trust what you say.

How many days? Ever tired of being proved wrong by everyone you challenge? You went way off topic to try to score, and air balled it. Call a timeout, walk off the court, and save some dignity.

Also, you never “asked” anything. But you do you, it’s been working well for you.

 

[BigErnNP]

Why is a debate of which slave were worse going on? Seems like everyone in the thread is arguing over nothing and are basically on the same page as far as the topic of reparations. No one agrees with them being given.

Those that push to get them seem to just want a handout which is pretty typical from what I've seen of society at this current time.

Thinking we all can just agree that it's not acceptable (slavery) and not one of us have been personally involved in it.

 

[churchmouse]

You guys r thinking in circles and now you have yourselves surrounded.

"STOP IT"

 

[JettaKnight]

Why is a debate of which slave were worse going on? Seems like everyone in the thread is arguing over nothing and are basically on the same page as far as the topic of reparations. No one agrees with them being given.

Those that push to get them seem to just want a handout which is pretty typical from what I've seen of society at this current time.

Thinking we all can just agree that it's not acceptable (slavery) and not one of us have been personally involved in it.

Welcome to INGO.

 

[buckwacker]

Why is a debate of which slave were worse going on? Seems like everyone in the thread is arguing over nothing and are basically on the same page as far as the topic of reparations. No one agrees with them being given.

Those that push to get them seem to just want a handout which is pretty typical from what I've seen of society at this current time.

Thinking we all can just agree that it's not acceptable (slavery) and not one of us have been personally involved in it.

It stems from the insistence of some to continuously pick at the scab of that wound in a nonsensical dishonest effort to paint their political opposition as closet racist defenders of the practice.

 

[jamil]

while 28% of free blacks had one or more slaves, so not really “a small percentage of black people also owned slaves”

What's wrong with this has pretty much been laid out. 28% doesn't really mean anything other than some free/former slaves owned some slaves. That was a very small group compared to all blacks. But also that 28% cannot be extrapolated to represent all free blacks in slave states.

Let's see your proof that the professor is wrong. The professor spent time researching this you spent 5 seconds trying to refute him without proof.

It did not seem to me that the professor was saying what you thought he said. If he was making a blanket statement that 28% of free blacks throughout the slave states were slave owners themselves, I'd say he's not a very good professor of statistics.

Slavery may have ended then, but the racism, segregation, exclusion that derived from it certainly didn't end then.

It's not a clear case that racism, segregation, exclusion derived from slavery. Rather I would submit that slavery derived, at least a little, from an attitude of superiority. Also, the overt acts of racism, segregation, exclusion that happened post slavery wasn't as much because of slavery as it was the circumstances of the reconstruction.

Both Lincoln and Johnson understood that reconstruction had to go slow. I think, regardless of what people think of Lincoln, probably reconstruction would not have the impact it had on Black people if Lincoln wasn't killed. Johnson could not slow reconstruction because the idealistic Republicans were impatient and wanted to punish the South. It was basically the real reason for Johnson's impeachment.

"That was never, and could never be the case in North America." Is FALSE. Just calling you out on a false statement. A black man has been president. Not only is that equal to my social status it may be a little above me.

Fredrick Douglas?

C'mon. That's not substantively relevant. Douglas lived as a more prominent Black man in a free state. But even then he was still not regarded as equal to white people by more than a few people. The point Kut made was constrained by context, which was pre-war slave states. So during slavery, even those black slaver owners were not considered equals to whites.

I prefer a professor who actually studied this out over your 5 sec reply to fit your agenda.


Here's my agenda.

Make African tribes that rounded up and sold millions of Africans as slaves pay reparations.

What is your agenda?

Honestly, does anyone believe that anyone participating in this thread really believes in reparations for slavery?

Because I don't believe anyone does. I think that Kut and some others are attacking some arguments that they think are bad, and frankly some of them are.

The utility of the fact that some black people owned slaves is only marginally pursuant to the argument against reparations because there were so few. 28% of the very small number of black slave owners in one town cannot be extrapolated to all the slave states. And some of those slave states would not have allowed blacks even to own slaves. But, for a number of the Black slave owners, they bought their own relatives so that they could free them where it was legal to do so, or keep them safe as "slaves" in their ownership.

The second useless argument, and I'm sure I'm going to **** off some people on both sides for saying it, is "my peoples was mistreated more than your peoples." Who seriously gives a ****? Slavery sucked for all slaves. Some suffered more, some suffered less. It's not a contest. And it's not a point that wins any arguments. People should probably drop that.

But, the argument that Irish were essentially held as slaves does have some utility pursuant to refuting the idea that the institution of slavery is all about Blacks. In the US slavery was nearly all about Blacks. And it was because of the fact that if all Blacks are slaves, because they are black, it's easy to identify who are slaves. Makes it really hard to escape and stay escaped.

But slavery is nearly as old as human civilization. It still happening in the world right now. As morality evolved/matured, the West abolished it, at least legally. But the period in which it was mostly focused on Blacks was constrained to a specific time period and mostly involved the West, notwithstanding that African Slaves were sold all over the world.

 

[jamil]

So why argue your math and not find a citation from a professional proving your point correctly, then debate or accept from there? Debates aren’t typically using a citation and quotes from a study and the other person saying “no, it’s wrong, I’m right” without providing some sort of quotes and citations of their own.

Like I said in my post above, it doesn't sound to me like the point claimed is actually cited, unless the professor is an idiot. You can't make a blanket statement that 28% of free Blacks owned slaves. It would have to be constrained to just the slave states, and...well, I made the case above so just refer to that.

 

[jamil]

Why is a debate of which slave were worse going on? Seems like everyone in the thread is arguing over nothing and are basically on the same page as far as the topic of reparations. No one agrees with them being given.

Those that push to get them seem to just want a handout which is pretty typical from what I've seen of society at this current time.

Thinking we all can just agree that it's not acceptable (slavery) and not one of us have been personally involved in it.

So much this, I can't "like" it enough. It's a ridiculous argument all the way around.

 

[buckwacker]

C'mon. That's not substantively relevant. Douglas lived as a more prominent Black man in a free state. But even then he was still not regarded as equal to white people by more than a few people. The point Kut made was constrained by context, which was pre-war slave states. So during slavery, even those black slaver owners were not considered equals to whites.

He said blacks couldn't achieve elevated status in America or North America, which the last time I sat in geography class encompasses more than the Confederate States of America. He also didn't say equal he said something like upper echelons, which I interpret to mean prominence. I mean Douglas was more well known and respected by sizeable segments of northern American society that the vast majority of white average Joes.

 

[jamil]

He said blacks couldn't achieve elevated status in America or North America, which the last time I sat in geography class encompasses more than the Confederate States of America. He also didn't say equal he said something like upper echelons, which I interpret to mean prominence. I mean Douglas was more well known and respected by sizeable segments of northern American society that the vast majority of white average Joes.

It was clear to me from the context of that post that it was constrained to the period of slavery and within slave states. Specifically y'all were talking about Black slave owners.

And. Don't forget. Douglas, though he reached a high status for a Black person, and though he had earned the respect of many, he was not regarded as equal to Whites. He was just an exceptional Negro. So Douglas doesn't really serve the purpose of counterpoint. In fact, as I initially read Kut's post, Douglas came to mind as a counterpoint, but I quickly dismissed it because it wasn't.

 

[kickbacked]

What's wrong with this has pretty much been laid out. 28% doesn't really mean anything other than some free/former slaves owned some slaves. That was a very small group compared to all blacks. But also that 28% cannot be extrapolated to represent all free blacks in slave states.



It did not seem to me that the professor was saying what you thought he said. If he was making a blanket statement that 28% of free blacks throughout the slave states were slave owners themselves, I'd say he's not a very good professor of statistics.