Slavery Good?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
121

[quote]drag0n252pi wrote:
Boy you sure are defensive. I was a cop for 25 years did narcotics work and homicide. I saw the worst that humanity had to offer so please get off your grand stand and stop telling me I turn a blind eye to the problems. I was part of the solution just as you were in the military. prim?i?tive (prm-tv) KEY

ADJECTIVE:

Not derived from something else; primary or basic.

Of or relating to an earliest or original stage or state; primeval.
Being little evolved from an early ancestral type.
Characterized by simplicity or crudity; unsophisticated: primitive weapons. See Synonyms at rude.
Anthropology Of or relating to a nonindustrial, often tribal culture, especially one that is characterized by a low level of economic complexity: primitive societies.
Linguistics

Just in case you were unsure of the meaning. [/quote]

I could care less about you being a cop. You still haven’t told me why you seem to think the native American culture was “primitive”. They were extremely sophisticated in social structure and government.

122

[quote]TeeVee69 wrote:
drag0n252pi:

Since you’re responding to several people, please use the quote function. That would be the second icon to the right of each message. It’s near impossible to figure out who or what you’re addressing.[/quote]

I’m glad you mentioned that. You would think he would have caught on by now considering how superior his culture is to everyone else’s.

123

[quote]rainjack wrote:
WHy is there nothing said about the black slaveowners? Why is it all the fault of the Southern white man?

Why is there no blame placed on the black africans that sold their brothers into slavery?
[/quote]

I don’t think any willing participant who perpetuated the institution of slavery can be held blameless.

But let’s be honest: who controlled the institution? Who created the demand for slaves? In that regard, the “whitey” bears the higher burden of responsibility and hence receives the brunt of the blame.

124

Tee Vee69

THose were professional pics and besides you have something against biker gear? I suppose you dress GQ and work for a fortune 500 company?

125

I gave you enough proof go figure it out college boy.

126

Prof,

Maybe if you had a higher mental capacity and not so primitive you could follow it.

127

[quote]Professor X wrote:
drag0n252pi wrote:
Boy you sure are defensive. I was a cop for 25 years did narcotics work and homicide. I saw the worst that humanity had to offer so please get off your grand stand and stop telling me I turn a blind eye to the problems. I was part of the solution just as you were in the military. prim?i?tive (prm-tv) KEY

ADJECTIVE:

Not derived from something else; primary or basic.

Of or relating to an earliest or original stage or state; primeval.
Being little evolved from an early ancestral type.
Characterized by simplicity or crudity; unsophisticated: primitive weapons. See Synonyms at rude.
Anthropology Of or relating to a nonindustrial, often tribal culture, especially one that is characterized by a low level of economic complexity: primitive societies.
Linguistics

Just in case you were unsure of the meaning.

I could care less about you being a cop. You still haven’t told me why you seem to think the native American culture was “primitive”. They were extremely sophisticated in social structure and government. [/quote]

Prof just so you could follow along, If they were so sophisticated as you put it then why were they overrun by a more advanced society? You want to play semantics here and you keep repeating the smae useless meaningless diatribe.

128

[quote]drag0n252pi wrote:
Prof,

Maybe if you had a higher mental capacity and not so primitive you could follow it.[/quote]

Actually, it’s common sense that if you respond to someone and don’t even mention their name (like you have several times in this thread) that no one will know who you are talking to. That shows no negatives as far as MY intellect. It sure does speak volumes about someone else’s though…

129

[quote]drag0n252pi wrote:
Tee Vee69

THose were professional pics and besides you have something against biker gear? I suppose you dress GQ and work for a fortune 500 company?[/quote]

Well, at least this time I could figure out who you’re addressing your comments to. Thank you. But really, learn to use that quote function. It really isn’t too hard. Instead of the first triangle you click on, just move your mouse further down until you get to the second icon.

I have nothing against biker gear. I was just wondering if your wife and children knew and approved of the lifestyle that sort of outfit suggests. Not that there’s anything wrong with that kind of lifestyle, mind you. I’m as tolerant as they come.

Me? Dress GQ and work for a Fortune 500 company? Damn, how did you figure that out? Are you psychic?

130

[quote]drag0n252pi wrote:
Tee Vee69

THose were professional pics and besides you have something against biker gear? I suppose you dress GQ and work for a fortune 500 company?[/quote]

Holy crap, I just caught that point about it being “professional pics.” You mean to tell me all cops in your area pose for pictures like that? That’s hilarious.

I can imagine the conversations in your household:

Your children: “Mommy, daddy’s dressing up for work again. I’m scared.”

Your wife: “Don’t worry, honey. It’ll pass – I hope.”

131

[quote]drag0n252pi wrote:
If they were so sophisticated as you put it then why were they overrun by a more advanced society? You want to play semantics here and you keep repeating the smae useless meaningless diatribe.[/quote]

Sophistication in social structure and government, which native Americans had, has little to do with more advanced weaponry and warfare tactics, which the U.S. government had. That does not make the cultures of native Americans primative by any means.

Honestly, are you really this shallow with respect to understanding other human cultures or is this all just an act like that avatar outfit of yours?

132

[quote]TeeVee69 wrote:
drag0n252pi wrote:
If they were so sophisticated as you put it then why were they overrun by a more advanced society? You want to play semantics here and you keep repeating the smae useless meaningless diatribe.

Sophistication in social structure and government, which native Americans had, has little to do with more advanced weaponry and warfare tactics, which the U.S. government had. That does not make the cultures of native Americans primative by any means.

Honestly, are you really this shallow with respect to understanding other human cultures or is this all just an act like that avatar outfit of yours?[/quote]

You forgot to mention how dirty the early settlers played…like giving infected bed sheets to the native americans without telling them as a trade. It was all out early chemical warfare on those people. He is blaming the native Americans for not playing dirty enough?

133

[quote]Professor X wrote:
You forgot to mention how dirty the early settlers played…like giving infected bed sheets to the native americans without telling them as a trade. It was all out early chemical warfare on those people. He is blaming the native Americans for not playing dirty enough?[/quote]

Honestly - don’t you guys find it more than just slightly hypocritical to sit here and look down you noses at what happened in our formative years - especially in the West - while you relax in the comfort of your house that was once the sovereign land of the American Indian.

You have no place talking, unless you are willing to give everything back that you took from the Indians. Then maybe you would look like something other than a Hate America First hypocrite.

You are all enjoying the benefits of our takeover of this land. You guys are embarassingly self-righteous. How much of your wealth have you returned to a Native American? Short of turning everything you have back, you are all hypocrites.

134

[quote]TeeVee69 wrote:
drag0n252pi wrote:
If they were so sophisticated as you put it then why were they overrun by a more advanced society? You want to play semantics here and you keep repeating the smae useless meaningless diatribe.

Sophistication in social structure and government, which native Americans had, has little to do with more advanced weaponry and warfare tactics, which the U.S. government had. That does not make the cultures of native Americans primative by any means.

Honestly, are you really this shallow with respect to understanding other human cultures or is this all just an act like that avatar outfit of yours?[/quote]

That outfit really bothers you. Yeah I dressed like that for work because I worked under cover. I also dressed many other ways for work, suit and tie and such. But if you need to stoop so low then go ahead. You should look so good at 54.

135

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Professor X wrote:
You forgot to mention how dirty the early settlers played…like giving infected bed sheets to the native americans without telling them as a trade. It was all out early chemical warfare on those people. He is blaming the native Americans for not playing dirty enough?

Honestly - don’t you guys find it more than just slightly hypocritical to sit here and look down you noses at what happened in our formative years - especially in the West - while you relax in the comfort of your house that was once the sovereign land of the American Indian.

You have no place talking, unless you are willing to give everything back that you took from the Indians. Then maybe you would look like something other than a Hate America First hypocrite.

You are all enjoying the benefits of our takeover of this land. You guys are embarassingly self-righteous. How much of your wealth have you returned to a Native American? Short of turning everything you have back, you are all hypocrites.[/quote]

When was the last time you looked at how much the federal government confiscates of your taxes to give away? Yep some of it goes to the Tribes and they are also making billions with their casinos employing many tribe members all paid for by us. I dont look down my nose at any culture or civilization. I have traveled all over the world and seen it all. I work in a hospital know as the director of security and I see every day the inhumanity that man does to man. Dont preach to the choir.

136

[quote]TeeVee69 wrote:
drag0n252pi wrote:
Tee Vee69

THose were professional pics and besides you have something against biker gear? I suppose you dress GQ and work for a fortune 500 company?

Holy crap, I just caught that point about it being “professional pics.” You mean to tell me all cops in your area pose for pictures like that? That’s hilarious.

I can imagine the conversations in your household:

Your children: “Mommy, daddy’s dressing up for work again. I’m scared.”

Your wife: “Don’t worry, honey. It’ll pass – I hope.”[/quote]

No you’re not intolerant, no not at all. Just another fucking bigoted asshole.

137

[quote]drag0n252pi wrote:
When was the last time you looked at how much the federal government confiscates of your taxes to give away? Yep some of it goes to the Tribes and they are also making billions with their casinos employing many tribe members all paid for by us. I dont look down my nose at any culture or civilization. I have traveled all over the world and seen it all. I work in a hospital know as the director of security and I see every day the inhumanity that man does to man. Dont preach to the choir.[/quote]

My grandmother was Cherokee indian. Contrary to your apparent belief, they are not a rich people and any money given to them doesn’t justify the means in which much of that land was originally taken.

Rainjack’s response also confuses me…as if we should ignore what was done in the past simply because we were born after an event. It is not hypocritical for the children of a past event to note the negatives that occured, even if only for the sake of discussion. Otherwise, future generations are born with no in depth knowledge of the past. Understanding where you came from is essential in order to build from that point.

You mentioned “inhumanity”, meanwhile you look down your nose at every other culture but your own. Everyone else before us was “primitive” living in the “dark ages” according to you. Thank GOD the Europeans came along and “saved” all of those other cultures through slavery and hostile take over. You seem to have no respect for other cultures different than your bike-riding-leather-wearing-sunglasses see directly in front of them. I am glad you work security at a hospital. I would hate to see you in charge of actually saving any of those lives directly.

138

[quote]rainjack wrote:
You have no place talking, unless you are willing to give everything back that you took from the Indians. Then maybe you would look like something other than a Hate America First hypocrite.

You are all enjoying the benefits of our takeover of this land. You guys are embarassingly self-righteous. How much of your wealth have you returned to a Native American? Short of turning everything you have back, you are all hypocrites.[/quote]

Rainjack, nobody is bashing America. I love this country every bit as much as you do.

But you are being disingenuous if you’re going to ignore and sweep under the rug all the injustices that we as a country have inflicted on members of our own population. It is not bashing America to admit our past wrongs.

Condemning past actions such as the institution of slavery and the slaughter of native Americans DOES NOT equate to Hating America. The Japanese have a problem with owning up to history. I would hope Americans do not share that problem.

And for the record: I contributed (quite unwillingly) about $1,000 of my wealth earlier this year to a nearby Indian casino. Surely not enough to make up for their past losses, but I’ve done my part. So does that give me at least some right to make a comment from the peanut gallery? Sheesh…

139

[quote]drag0n252pi wrote:
No you’re not intolerant, no not at all. Just another fucking bigoted asshole. [/quote]

Whoa, take it easy there. No need to resort to name-calling. I would think that your superior cultural viewpoint could see through to the fact that I was just having fun at your expense. But if I’ve offended you with my comments about your outfit, I apologize. But you must admit: given your extreme views and manner of dress, you are setting yourself up to be a target.

Nice to see you finally learned to use that quote function. See, it wasn’t that difficult to change some bad habits, now was it?

Cheers!

140

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Here’s a link to a Anthropology pprofessor’s notes:

http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:E5RmtPyTeoIJ:www.abdn.ac.uk/anthropology/notes/Level1/AT1002/at1002.lecture08.doc+selective+breeding+of+slaves&hl=en&client=firefox-a

This is just a blurb supporting my contention that slaves were bred like farm animals - not for their ability to think -

In effect, slaves were regarded as no different from domestic animals, apart from the facts that they could speak and moved on two legs rather than four!

You asked for proof - you have it. Slaves were bred like animals. In fact there are published cases of slaveowners being in the slave breeding business. Why? It was more profitable than farming.

I’m sure YOU can look it up in the library as you have chided me to do. [/quote]

LMAO! All you could find was an obscure college lecture note by an unknown author? You’re f-ing kidding me, right?

You have yet to back up that slaves were BROUGHT TO THIS COUNTRY TO BE BRED LIKE FARM ANIMALS.

Conversely, I’ve shown you several reputable sources verifying that THE ORIGINAL INTENTION of slave trade in this country was the IMPORTATION OF AGRICULTURAL KNOWLEDGE AS WELL AS manual labor.

The blacks that survived many generations of harsh conditions in their native Africa certainly made for a hearty genetic stock. Additionally, the long, brutal journey across the Atlantic to the Americas was only survived by the strongest of these Africans. But that is COMPLETELY different from selective breeding.

I’m really not sure whether to laugh at you, be angry with you or feel pity for you. Obviously you’re deluded by this myth. That’s your own problem though. And as I’ve noticed from your unsolicited reply to my post on another messageboard, your frustrations at failing to produce any semblance of a respectable, factual backing of your claims that blacks in the US are born from “selectively bred stock” is being focused on me. Not a problem. Unlike you, it’s not personal for me. Maybe because I can actually be open enough to see the other side and, well…there’s nothing there to see.