[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
You would have clobbered them with farm equipment and cotton balls.
[/quote]
Another racist asshole making light of slavery. [/quote]
Another idiot thinking that rage alone is worth shit in a military confrontation.
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
You would have clobbered them with farm equipment and cotton balls.
[/quote]
Another racist asshole making light of slavery. [/quote]
That was not racist. Did you know throughout history the majority of slaves were white?
Besides this, what orion states is facts. Slaves were not warriors, trained with weapons. They were the landowning farmers’ beasts of burden. They could have only rebelled with what rudimentary equipment and skills they had available to them.[/quote]
No we weren’t animals, that is just how those devil slave masters viewed us. And best believe that when some of those guns fell into our hands, you would have been slaughtered like the pigs you were.
[/quote]
Yeah.
Sure.
They would have found out how to use those guns, how to take care of them, how to make bullets and gunpowder, all in secret, while the overwhelming majority worked 10-12 hour days and were illiterate.
And then, they would have taken on a full blown army, with trained soldiers, cannons, cavalry, a navy and provisions to last a decade.
In a territory that was hostile to them, with no outside forces to help by sending even food or clothes, let alone materiel.
Why Sir, now I see the light of day, you are of course perfectly right.
All the white people kidnapped, enslaved and possibly raped by Africans might have clouded my judgment.
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
You would have clobbered them with farm equipment and cotton balls.
[/quote]
Another racist asshole making light of slavery. [/quote]
That was not racist. Did you know throughout history the majority of slaves were white?
Besides this, what orion states is facts. Slaves were not warriors, trained with weapons. They were the landowning farmers’ beasts of burden. They could have only rebelled with what rudimentary equipment and skills they had available to them.[/quote]
No we weren’t animals, that is just how those devil slave masters viewed us. And best believe that when some of those guns fell into our hands, you would have been slaughtered like the pigs you were.
[/quote]
Technically humans are animals and yes slaves are beasts of burden. They only reason to own a slave is to force him to work like a farm beast.
Did you also know that the majority of people in history were not slave owners…just like many people did not own their own horse. It takes a lot of resources to maintain a beast of burden.
It is weird that with supposedly so few slave owners and a disproportionate number of slaves that there never was a real slave rebellion. I wonder why that is…?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
You would have clobbered them with farm equipment and cotton balls.
[/quote]
You clearly would need weapons seeing as though we dominate boxing and football. Drop the guns and you all would get your asses crushed by the black fist. And we would get weapons eventually the same way underground guerrilla armies get them. Or is that too fantastic for you?
[/quote]
Ok, who is this troll anyway?
This is just too bizarre to be real.
It IS quite funny, though![/quote]
You are the one who is idiotic to think that American society could have kept us in chains indefinitely. [/quote]
Throughout the world slavery ended without rebellion.[/quote]
Oh? Toussaint L’Ouverture takes exception. Haitian Revolution - Wikipedia
[quote]
The US was one of the last places on earth where slavery still existed - it was on its way out the door before Lincoln ever conceived of the idea of the Emancipation Proclamation (delivered 2 years after the start of the War of Northern Aggression).[/quote]
Arguable, I suppose.
But if it were true that “it was on its way out the door,” why did all the attempts at compensated emancipation–between 1847 and 1862, whether pre-War, or in the border states and Delaware–fail? Lincoln, among others, was willing to pay “market prices” for the freedom of slaves, and their overtures were rejected by Southerners, whether as politicians, individuals, at war or at peace. Surely, if slavery was truly “on its way out the door,” slaveholders would have taken the cash and rid themselves of the inefficient slaves. That did not happen. Apparently, if one adheres to the belief that market forces mold behavior, slave-holding was still more valuable to slave-holders.
For a more detailed view of history than that to which Lifty subscribes:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
You would have clobbered them with farm equipment and cotton balls.
[/quote]
Another racist asshole making light of slavery. [/quote]
That was not racist. Did you know throughout history the majority of slaves were white?
Besides this, what orion states is facts. Slaves were not warriors, trained with weapons. They were the landowning farmers’ beasts of burden. They could have only rebelled with what rudimentary equipment and skills they had available to them.[/quote]
No we weren’t animals, that is just how those devil slave masters viewed us. And best believe that when some of those guns fell into our hands, you would have been slaughtered like the pigs you were.
[/quote]
Yeah.
Sure.
They would have found out how to use those guns, how to take care of them, how to make bullets and gunpowder, all in secret, while the overwhelming majority worked 10-12 hour days and were illiterate.
And then, they would have taken on a full blown army, with trained soldiers, cannons, cavalry, a navy and provisions to last a decade.
In a territory that was hostile to them, with no outside forces to help by sending even food or clothes, let alone materiel.
Why Sir, now I see the light of day, you are of course perfectly right.
All the white people kidnapped, enslaved and possibly raped by Africans might have clouded my judgment. [/quote]
Clearly you are forgetting that “they” dominate in boxing and football.[/quote]
Well, if someone with superior boxing skills charges me, I might have to rely on long range rifles.
Not to mention what an artillery unit with grape shot will do to an army of superior football players.
What would be downright awesome is to see how an army of superior boxers outboxes a cavalry charge.
Anyhow, clearly the supposedly innate physical superiority of native Africans is more than a match for advanced weapons and tactics, which is why this website is in Swahili after all.
Plus, a final quote for MM:
Whatever happens, we have got, the Maxim gun and they have not.
Which, incidentally, is roughly from that era.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
I think what he meant is, would you volunteer, if possible, with your free time (in some imaginary scenario that didn’t involve traveling for 2 days to get there)?[/quote]
Oleena (and by extension Steven F)… if this is the true nature of the question, then, yes, I personally believe that it is every citizen’s duty to volunteer some time to contribute to our national defense. That may sound draconian, but if everyone has a stake in participation then everyone understands the sacrifices that the professional soldiers make.
However, I do not think that this type of volunteering means defensive training (with weapons, etc…) but somehow everyone should contribute. And let me reiterate… this should be voluntary. Anything other than voluntary runs contrary to our ideals of freedom.
JM
Also… let me add this overall…
One of the things I love about T-Nation is that in any given thread there can be a legitimate conversation going on and then the sheer comedy of the exchanges between Method Man and everyone else. I always come here for knowledge and leave smiling!
JM
[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
You would have clobbered them with farm equipment and cotton balls.
[/quote]
You clearly would need weapons seeing as though we dominate boxing and football. Drop the guns and you all would get your asses crushed by the black fist. And we would get weapons eventually the same way underground guerrilla armies get them. Or is that too fantastic for you?
[/quote]
Ok, who is this troll anyway?
This is just too bizarre to be real.
It IS quite funny, though![/quote]
You are the one who is idiotic to think that American society could have kept us in chains indefinitely. [/quote]
Throughout the world slavery ended without rebellion.[/quote]
Oh? Toussaint L’Ouverture takes exception. Haitian Revolution - Wikipedia
[quote]
The US was one of the last places on earth where slavery still existed - it was on its way out the door before Lincoln ever conceived of the idea of the Emancipation Proclamation (delivered 2 years after the start of the War of Northern Aggression).[/quote]
Arguable, I suppose.
But if it were true that “it was on its way out the door,” why did all the attempts at compensated emancipation–between 1847 and 1862, whether pre-War, or in the border states and Delaware–fail? Lincoln, among others, was willing to pay “market prices” for the freedom of slaves, and their overtures were rejected by Southerners, whether as politicians, individuals, at war or at peace. Surely, if slavery was truly “on its way out the door,” slaveholders would have taken the cash and rid themselves of the inefficient slaves. That did not happen. Apparently, if one adheres to the belief that market forces mold behavior, slave-holding was still more valuable to slave-holders.
For a more detailed view of history than that to which Lifty subscribes:
Bahahaha! Slavery still exists in Haiti.
The point about slavery being out the door was aimed at the fact that the seeds of liberty had been planted by the American Revolution (which one could argue was a real slave rebellion).
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
You would have clobbered them with farm equipment and cotton balls.
[/quote]
You clearly would need weapons seeing as though we dominate boxing and football. Drop the guns and you all would get your asses crushed by the black fist. And we would get weapons eventually the same way underground guerrilla armies get them. Or is that too fantastic for you?
[/quote]
Ok, who is this troll anyway?
This is just too bizarre to be real.
It IS quite funny, though![/quote]
You are the one who is idiotic to think that American society could have kept us in chains indefinitely. [/quote]
Throughout the world slavery ended without rebellion.[/quote]
Oh? Toussaint L’Ouverture takes exception. Haitian Revolution - Wikipedia
[quote]
The US was one of the last places on earth where slavery still existed - it was on its way out the door before Lincoln ever conceived of the idea of the Emancipation Proclamation (delivered 2 years after the start of the War of Northern Aggression).[/quote]
Arguable, I suppose.
But if it were true that “it was on its way out the door,” why did all the attempts at compensated emancipation–between 1847 and 1862, whether pre-War, or in the border states and Delaware–fail? Lincoln, among others, was willing to pay “market prices” for the freedom of slaves, and their overtures were rejected by Southerners, whether as politicians, individuals, at war or at peace. Surely, if slavery was truly “on its way out the door,” slaveholders would have taken the cash and rid themselves of the inefficient slaves. That did not happen. Apparently, if one adheres to the belief that market forces mold behavior, slave-holding was still more valuable to slave-holders.
For a more detailed view of history than that to which Lifty subscribes:
Bahahaha! Slavery still exists in Haiti.
The point about slavery being out the door was aimed at the fact that the seeds of liberty had been planted by the American Revolution (which one could argue was a real slave rebellion).[/quote]
Oh, I see…this is where you get to re-define your terms to suit your feeble arguments.
No, thanks. Bye.
[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
Oh, I see…this is where you get to re-define your terms to suit your feeble arguments.
No, thanks. Bye.[/quote]
No, this is where you get to ignore reality because it inconveniences your world view.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]DrSkeptix wrote:
Oh, I see…this is where you get to re-define your terms to suit your feeble arguments.
No, thanks. Bye.[/quote]
No, this is where you get to ignore reality because it inconveniences your world view.
Oh, the Google-master at work again.
I thought you meant slavery as a legal institution and sancitoned cultural institution, which was ended by the Haitian Revolution, and not child labor as an illegal and unsanctioned institution.
By my definition…the exception to your general statement holds. Just an historical point worth considering.
No, I meant slavery as in forced labor, sans individual liberty whether it is sanctioned or not by a legal framework.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
No, I meant slavery as in forced labor, sans individual liberty whether it is sanctioned or not by a legal framework.[/quote]
Well gee, Lift, aren’t we ALL slaves in your world view?[/quote]
At least we are afforded the illusion of freedom…some people still do not even get that.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]method_man wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
You would have clobbered them with farm equipment and cotton balls.
[/quote]
Another racist asshole making light of slavery. [/quote]
That was not racist. Did you know throughout history the majority of slaves were white?
Besides this, what orion states is facts. Slaves were not warriors, trained with weapons. They were the landowning farmers’ beasts of burden. They could have only rebelled with what rudimentary equipment and skills they had available to them.[/quote]
No we weren’t animals, that is just how those devil slave masters viewed us. And best believe that when some of those guns fell into our hands, you would have been slaughtered like the pigs you were.
[/quote]
Yeah.
Sure.
They would have found out how to use those guns, how to take care of them, how to make bullets and gunpowder, all in secret, while the overwhelming majority worked 10-12 hour days and were illiterate.
And then, they would have taken on a full blown army, with trained soldiers, cannons, cavalry, a navy and provisions to last a decade.
In a territory that was hostile to them, with no outside forces to help by sending even food or clothes, let alone materiel.
Why Sir, now I see the light of day, you are of course perfectly right.
All the white people kidnapped, enslaved and possibly raped by Africans might have clouded my judgment. [/quote]
Clearly you are forgetting that “they” dominate in boxing and football.[/quote]
Well, if someone with superior boxing skills charges me, I might have to rely on long range rifles.
Not to mention what an artillery unit with grape shot will do to an army of superior football players.
What would be downright awesome is to see how an army of superior boxers outboxes a cavalry charge.
Anyhow, clearly the supposedly innate physical superiority of native Africans is more than a match for advanced weapons and tactics, which is why this website is in Swahili after all.
Plus, a final quote for MM:
Whatever happens, we have got, the Maxim gun and they have not.
Which, incidentally, is roughly from that era. [/quote]
This country is loaded with guns, both legal and illegal. Like these would not have fallen into the hands of slaves in its own country. And not too mention that the US is not even largely agrarian anymore. Perhaps you forgot about the industrial revolution?