Liberal Forum

Vegas » 14 Feb 2023, 2:02 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2023, 2:02 pm

First, this is way too long for most, if not all, lefties to read. It's above your garde level, so don't even bother. Just skip down to the last sentence. 

7% of the South's population, in 1860, owned 3 million of the 4 million slaves. There were 5 million whites, in the South, that were dirt poor. They are rarely mentioned, but their conditions were just as deplorable as the slaves. In fact, many of these poor whites worked for the 7% to police the slaves. It was work, so...

Before the civil war, from the beginning, this has mostly been the case. Planters and industrialists were the few, slave labor pitted against white labor was the mass. The few ruled the mass. This has always been the case since before America broke free of Britain. 

 The real question is, can we draw a straight line, from the accumulation of wealth we enjoy today, to the exploitations of slavery back then? We say that slavery was centuries ago, it has no effect on the wealth we have today. I say, that is incorrect. A straight line can be drawn: 

Exploitation of slavery lead to enormous profit of the few.
The few hired millions of dirt-poor whites to police the slaves.
Poor whites emerged to middle class due to this new work. 
Middle class whites now accumulated their own land, homes, modest luxuries, and even some slaves.
The middle class rolled on to the present day rooted in the exploitation of slavery, and exploitation of black labors after the civil war. 

In short, we inherited the wealth from the back of slaves. 
 

ha ha ha ha what the hell do you expect from trickle down economics where government works inside out and the governed think outside in. Gravity always returns expanding details leave the core of equal separation here contracting results arrive at the end of their reproductive cycle.

Skans » 14 Feb 2023, 2:42 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2023, 2:42 pm

While slavery did lead to profits of plantation owners pre-Civil War, all of that wealth was completely lost, destroyed and/or confiscated through:

• The cost of engaging in a war paid to the southern states to fight the North
• Loss of slaves after emancipation - the slave owners were never compensated for the loss of their property 
• Loss of plantation owners' business and crop production
• Destruction of property during the invasion from Northern aggressors
• Loss of many white southern men during the war, leaving families completely destitute.
• Raping of what little wealth and property remained by carpetbaggers
• Northern military taking "spoils of victory" from the South

Whatever the South did build, whatever wealth southern land owners did accumulate disappeared.  Southern banks went bankrupt and out of business. Entire cities were destroyed and buried, like Atlanta.  And, confederate currency was worthless.  The South went bust after the war.  So, it's a complete fallacy to say that America was built on the backs of slaves.  It wasn't.,  America was re-built after the demise of slavery from the ground up.  And, while blacks over time may have been a part of that process, they were not slaves.  The South that was built pre-Civil War simply ceased to exist in any shape or form whatsoever.

this is wrong.  If you trace the genealogy of modern rich whites, they are descended from slave owners. modern poor whites OTOH have ancestors who were NOT slave owners

Examples available upon request

SJConspirator » 14 Feb 2023, 6:40 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2023, 6:40 pm

this is wrong.  If you trace the genealogy of modern rich whites, they are descended from slave owners. modern poor whites OTOH have ancestors who were NOT slave owners

Examples available upon request

circumstantial evidence is statistically averaging the past against each lifetime adapting forward in the moment here. It is an intellectual tool for those abusing the power of suggestion playing with organized doubt orchestrating social chaos amplifying sibling rivalries between state of mind mentalities coached in ignoring now is eternity throughout history.

there was an old quote in history "Mankind cannot legislate morality." either a person is honest or loyal to promises real isn't real so mankind believes they are exceptions to natural timing of reproductions mutually evolving forard one at a time here now.

Corruption comes from people taught self deception is better than just being equally alive genetically displaced now. Fools believe living isn't self evident.

So is dishonesty worse than corrupted? no.

SJConspirator » 14 Feb 2023, 6:40 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2023, 6:40 pm

this is wrong.  If you trace the genealogy of modern rich whites, they are descended from slave owners. modern poor whites OTOH have ancestors who were NOT slave owners

Examples available upon request

What do you have, 3 examples?  What about all  of the examples of slave owners who's businesses and lives were devastated by the war, the loss of their real property and their slave property?  Finding a few examples is providing a very false statistic and feeding into the false narrative of reparations for blacks. There were far more families who were thrown from riches into poverty than the few wealthy who can trace their genealogy back to slave owners.  Furthermore, you can't trace their wealth back to that time period.  Ancestors owning slaves can be an independent variable from how wealth was made or accumulated. 
 

SJConspirator » 14 Feb 2023, 6:40 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2023, 6:40 pm

this is wrong.  If you trace the genealogy of modern rich whites, they are descended from slave owners. modern poor whites OTOH have ancestors who were NOT slave owners

Examples available upon request

But this isn't because they managed to preserve the wealth of their ancestors. They didn't. All the rich families in the south before the civil war went bust afterward.

The real reason you see this phenomenon is because basically....these people still had strong genes. They were the sort of people with the talent and psychology to build wealth.
 

FOS » 15 Feb 2023, 8:56 am » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 8:56 am

But this isn't because they managed to preserve the wealth of their ancestors. They didn't. All the rich families in the south before the civil war went bust afterward.

The real reason you see this phenomenon is because basically....these people still had strong genes. They were the sort of people with the talent and psychology to build wealth.

There might be that.  And, there are "southern families" who's ancestors were actually carpetbaggers who migrated to the south, with some money in hand, to take advantage of cheap, cheap land and high demand for goods and services.
 

Skans » 15 Feb 2023, 9:01 am » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 9:01 am

There might be that.  And, there are "southern families" who's ancestors were actually carpetbaggers who migrated to the south, with some money in hand, to take advantage of cheap, cheap land and high demand for goods and services.

in my own family...about half came from ancient aristocratic bloodlines while the other half were 'self made'.. my grandfather became governor of the state of Georgia and his own parents were sharecroppers...the vacuum that existed in Southern elite made such upward mobility possible.

FOS » 15 Feb 2023, 9:06 am » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 9:06 am

in my own family...about half came from ancient aristocratic bloodlines while the other half were 'self made'.. my grandfather became governor of the state of Georgia and his own parents were sharecroppers...the vacuum that existed in Southern elite made such upward mobility possible.

I understand that.  And, thus why I disagree completely with @Vegas  OP.  Slaves in no shape or form built the United States of America which we have today.  This country is not ruled by former plantation owners. 
 

Skans » 15 Feb 2023, 9:11 am » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 9:11 am

I understand that.  And, thus why I disagree completely with @Vegas  OP.  Slaves in no shape or form built the United States of America which we have today.  This country is not ruled by former plantation owners.

They got the wheel spinning. Just because the wheel stopped spinning once doesn't mean the exploitation business model did. You have heard of the dimocrat plantation, right? The dims lost their first plantation, the literal tangible one, but built another one based on the same business model, just in a different form. 

Vegas » 14 Feb 2023, 2:02 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2023, 2:02 pm

First, this is way too long for most, if not all, lefties to read. It's above your garde level, so don't even bother. Just skip down to the last sentence. 

7% of the South's population, in 1860, owned 3 million of the 4 million slaves. There were 5 million whites, in the South, that were dirt poor. They are rarely mentioned, but their conditions were just as deplorable as the slaves. In fact, many of these poor whites worked for the 7% to police the slaves. It was work, so...

Before the civil war, from the beginning, this has mostly been the case. Planters and industrialists were the few, slave labor pitted against white labor was the mass. The few ruled the mass. This has always been the case since before America broke free of Britain. 

 The real question is, can we draw a straight line, from the accumulation of wealth we enjoy today, to the exploitations of slavery back then? We say that slavery was centuries ago, it has no effect on the wealth we have today. I say, that is incorrect. A straight line can be drawn: 

Exploitation of slavery lead to enormous profit of the few.
The few hired millions of dirt-poor whites to police the slaves.
Poor whites emerged to middle class due to this new work. 
Middle class whites now accumulated their own land, homes, modest luxuries, and even some slaves.
The middle class rolled on to the present day rooted in the exploitation of slavery, and exploitation of black labors after the civil war. 

In short, we inherited the wealth from the back of slaves.

Harsh reality's.

   We were all slaves and if you were lucky you could somehow negotiate your own boat transportation to the new world with your old world country just saying goodbye and don't ever contact us again.  Many came to the USA only by signing enslavement contracts.

  In 1783 the owner of the people inhabiting what was to become the fully recognized country, the United States of America were released from subject status, >>>>>>chattel property<<<<<<<, of former owner King George.

  Someone fought and died while living on tree bark in the winter time resulting in your enjoyment of freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of movement and individual contract negotiation ability's, etc.

A freeman became a serf usually through force or necessity. Sometimes the greater physical and legal force of a local magnate intimidated freeholders or allodial owners into dependency. Often a few years of crop failure, a war, or brigandage might leave a person unable to make his own way. In such a case, he could strike a bargain with a lord of a manor. In exchange for gaining protection, his service was required: in labour, produce, or cash, or a combination of all. These bargains became formalised in a ceremony known as "bondage", in which a serf placed his head in the lord's hands, akin to the ceremony of homage where a vassal placed his hands between those of his overlord. These oaths bound the lord and his new serf in a feudal contract and defined the terms of their agreement.

Often these bargains were severe.

 

Vegas » 15 Feb 2023, 10:10 am » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 10:10 am

They got the wheel spinning. Just because the wheel stopped spinning once doesn't mean the exploitation business model did. You have heard of the dimocrat plantation, right? The dims lost their first plantation, the literal tangible one, but built another one based on the same business model, just in a different form.

Democrats did not build any plantation.  I have heard this, but never bought into that ideology.  They do, however, promise "giveaways" in exchange for votes. They do this instead of doing what they know is genuinely right for us as a nation.  I object to that.
 

Skans » 15 Feb 2023, 11:16 am » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 11:16 am

Democrats did not build any plantation.  I have heard this, but never bought into that ideology.  They do, however, promise "giveaways" in exchange for votes. They do this instead of doing what they know is genuinely right for us as a nation.  I object to that.

Dimocrats are responsible for all oppression in America. All of it. 100% of it. Not 99.9%, but 100%

Vegas » 15 Feb 2023, 11:30 am » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 11:30 am

Dimocrats are responsible for all oppression in America. All of it. 100% of it. Not 99.9%, but 100%

Democrats are not smart enough to implement any master plan of oppression.  I do not dispute that their policies are oppressive because they really are. 
 

Skans » 15 Feb 2023, 11:34 am » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 11:34 am

Democrats are not smart enough to implement any master plan of oppression.  I do not dispute that their policies are oppressive because they really are.

They are the bane of man's existence. They don't need to be smart to implement a system, they just need to be themselves. It comes naturally. 

Vegas » 15 Feb 2023, 11:30 am » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 11:30 am

Dimocrats are responsible for all oppression in America. All of it. 100% of it. Not 99.9%, but 100%

Reasonable doubt does it, not just one party.

Democrats are EVIL. They are responsible for ALL the evil **** in this country. Slavery, KKK, Racism, Internment camps, Nuking Japan, Drugs, and everything they do they blame the other side of it. They are EVIL.

PhiloBeddo » 15 Feb 2023, 11:42 am » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 11:42 am

Democrats are EVIL. They are responsible for ALL the evil **** in this country. Slavery, KKK, Racism, Internment camps, Nuking Japan, Drugs, and everything they do they blame the other side of it. They are EVIL.

Every reality is founded on reasonable doubt reproductions are eternally separated while genetically present. Dare think about that for about a week since you lived part of hundreds of generations believing it isn't possible.

Vegas » 15 Feb 2023, 11:36 am » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 11:36 am

They are the bane of man's existence. They don't need to be smart to implement a system, they just need to be themselves. It comes naturally.

I'm not quite understanding your OP, and your refutation of my posts explaining how slavery had nothing to do with the re-construction of post civil war America.  When Democrats and Blacks claim that America was built on the backs of slaves, nothing could be further from the truth.
 

Skans » 15 Feb 2023, 12:02 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 12:02 pm

I'm not quite understanding your OP, and your refutation of my posts explaining how slavery had nothing to do with the re-construction of post civil war America.  When Democrats and Blacks claim that America was built on the backs of slaves, nothing could be further from the truth.

Cheap labor = enormous profits. 

At first, it was almost free labor: enormous profits and industrial progress. 
After war, blacks got paid slave wages, compared to the whites: enormous profits and industrial progress. 

Skans » 15 Feb 2023, 12:02 pm » wrote: ↑

15 Feb 2023, 12:02 pm

I'm not quite understanding your OP, and your refutation of my posts explaining how slavery had nothing to do with the re-construction of post civil war America.  When Democrats and Blacks claim that America was built on the backs of slaves, nothing could be further from the truth.
 

let me arrange some gibbersih for you, for reality to work a person has to slave away their biological time to make relative time logistics factual. there is no reward for adapting in the moment other than staying alive now.

Ponder that a while instinctively adapting to inhabiting space sharing the moment here evolving in series parallel displacement.