Well, the entire original basis of this thread is what DeSantis has pushed to have included in the AA history module of history classes, so let me ask your opinion:
Is the fact that some slaves learned some useful skills as a consequence of the labor they were forced to do and, as an unintentional consequence of that, used those skill to benefit themselves in some way, relevant to the study of slavery in the context of AA history?
It's an established fact that some slaves learned trades such as blacksmithing and then were able to use those skills to make a living after the emancipation.
How is that not relevant to the history if it happened?
It's possible to acknowledge this fact without making the leap that slavery was somehow a good thing.
As much as someone who learned how to type in Auschwitz and then later made a career as a secretary.
Japan would have been firebombed constantly to finish the war if not for the nuclear weapons. Yes, the deaths were tragic, but it saved far more Japanese lives.
but to leftists Japanese are basically white so they don't count
Do I need to pull up the 100 lies that I already cited from another post several months ago.
Lets start with you saying that blacks were better off being property of white people in America than being free in their own land.
So according to you it was better to be a property forever until the 1865 and then be a 2nd class citizen being terrorized for another 100 year with Jim Crow laws, than live free in your homeland.
You really need to just stop typing. You are by far the most racist POS I have ever encountered. We all know damn well, like I said many months ago that you don't know any black person and have never ever been invited to a black person's home and you certainly never invited one to yours. Your racism, prejudice and bigotries knows no bounds.
We all know you are scared little boy and would never ever dare say any of your BS lies to the face a grown African-American man (since you said we are violent and end up in prison).
If I lied as often as you say you wouldn't need to lie about what I said to prove it.
I NEVER said blacks were better off being slaves. I said people like YOU are better off today than your counterparts in Africa who's ancestors weren't enslaved in America.
You're college educated in the United States the richest country on the planet.
Meanwhile, the typical black person in sub-saharan Africa is uneducated and makes less than $2,000 a year. As always the facts are not on your side.
You can't name 1 lie yet you threaten violence in every other post... and then whine when it's pointed out that African-Americans commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime.
Who leads in murders of the other races. Whites are the all-time Champions. Hell you killed 3 million during the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, which you conceived and implemented.
How natives of the Americas did you kill?
How many Africans in Africa did you kill?
White people do have have the moral authority to talk about murder.
Dropped two atomic bombs on major Japanese cities killing civilians.
Wrong.
Blacks are the only race that commits a disproportionate amount murder outside of it's own group.
Giving people a disease you don't understand isn't "murder"...
The atomic bombs saved millions of lives.
The atomic bombs dropped on Japan killed over 200,000 people immediately and who knows how many died over time due to them.
It is speculation (propaganda really) to say they saved lives. If you think so, then why drop the 2nd bomb within 3 days of the first rather than letting the Japanese have time to surrender?
It's an established fact that some slaves learned trades such as blacksmithing and then were able to use those skills to make a living after the emancipation.
How is that not relevant to the history if it happened?
It's possible to acknowledge this fact without making the leap that slavery was somehow a good thing.
As much as someone who learned how to type in Auschwitz and then later made a career as a secretary.
Most people would have to actually try to miss the point to pull off missing the point as often as you do.
I don't agree with that reasoning - not everything that happens is relevant to something just because it coincided with that thing - but by that reasoning, how is the difference between chattel slavery in the Americas and the slavery practiced in Africa not relevant to the discussion of the impact that slavery has had on the populations upon which it was imposed?
Your focus is on the difference between Africans and African Americans, but when viewing the impact of chattel slavery, shouldn't the focus be on the difference that chattel slavery (and its legacy) had on the outcomes of African Americans relative to white Americans? Especially in that context, the differences between the two systems is very relevant.
Blacks are the only race that commits a disproportionate amount murder outside of it's own group.
Giving people a disease you don't understand isn't "murder"...
The atomic bombs saved millions of lives.
The atomic bombs dropped on Japan killed over 200,000 people immediately and who knows how many died over time due to them.
It is speculation (propaganda really) to say they saved lives. If you think so, then why drop the 2nd bomb within 3 days of the first rather than letting the Japanese have time to surrender?
The bombs were air bursts and the long term deaths due to radiation were very low.
It's not speculation at all to say they saved lives. You should read a little about how the Battle of Okinawa went.
3 days was plenty of time to surrender.
The Japanese killed almost as many women and children in China with bayonets than people were killed in the atomic blasts. Your pity is misplaced.
I don't agree with that reasoning - not everything that happens is relevant to something just because it coincided with that thing - but by that reasoning, how is the difference between chattel slavery in the Americas and the slavery practiced in Africa not relevant to the discussion of the impact that slavery has had on the populations upon which it was imposed?
Your focus is on the difference between Africans and African Americans, but when viewing the impact of chattel slavery, shouldn't the focus be on the difference that chattel slavery (and its legacy) had on the outcomes of African Americans relative to white Americans? Especially in that context, the differences between the two systems is very relevant.
How many years have to pass before every difference in society between white and black isn't blamed directly on slavery?
Blacks are the only race that commits a disproportionate amount murder outside of it's own group.
Giving people a disease you don't understand isn't "murder"...
The atomic bombs saved millions of lives.
The atomic bombs dropped on Japan killed over 200,000 people immediately and who knows how many died over time due to them.
It is speculation (propaganda really) to say they saved lives. If you think so, then why drop the 2nd bomb within 3 days of the first rather than letting the Japanese have time to surrender?
It would help you immensely to actually read a "real" book on history instead of relying on your own imagined history.
Well, the entire original basis of this thread is what DeSantis has pushed to have included in the AA history module of history classes, so let me ask your opinion:
Is the fact that some slaves learned some useful skills as a consequence of the labor they were forced to do and, as an unintentional consequence of that, used those skill to benefit themselves in some way, relevant to the study of slavery in the context of AA history?
It's an established fact that some slaves learned trades such as blacksmithing and then were able to use those skills to make a living after the emancipation.
How is that not relevant to the history if it happened?
It's possible to acknowledge this fact without making the leap that slavery was somehow a good thing.
Uh...there was this thing called chattel slavery in America. Apparently you didn't know that. Black people were property and their kids were property and their kids kids...which racist whites in the south wanted to continue forever. You do know they were forced to do whatever they were told or they were murdered right? Apparently not. American chattel slavery wasn't some jobs program.
Also why couldn't they learn to read and write....if slave masters were teaching skills?
There wasn't a single good thing about being a black slave in America and to try to come up with a reason says volumes about some racist white folks as they try to lie to change history. This is exactly why people are upset.
The only person who benefitted from slavery was the slave owner. But you continue to lie and say blacks were better off as property than free. No slave ever said that. Ever.
African immigrants, in particular certain Igbo groups, significantly outperform whites. Is this due to "racism" or a combination of culture (bachelor's degree isn't even celebrated because it's expected, just as one example) and intelligence?
and why, for example, do Swiss people outperform people of English descent in the US? If the woke CRT history were true, wouldn't the only successful group be English males?
These evil white countries are so abhorrent to the poor little brown people that to this day the poor little brown people are dying to get into the irredeemably racist white countries.
It's idiotic to pretend all cultures and civilizations are equal.
Do you honestly believe Mozart is equal to tribesmen grunting and beating on animal skin drums?
I appreciate the uninhibited ethnocentrism. It’s refreshing, really.
Mozart was a genius. So was Newton. So was al-Khwarizmi, who, as you know, invented algebra. You know who else is really smart? Hunter gatherers who know their environments incredibly well and can survive efficiently off of what’s around them. That takes a lot of knowledge and intelligence.
Maybe if you had dropped Mozart off on the banks of the Sepik River in 1770, his genius brain could have helped him figure out how to survive. And maybe if you had sent a young Nandi tribesman to study music in Salzberg, he would have written Don Giovanni. We’ll never know. But smart (and dumb) people are all around.
The fact that Mozart was able to study and write music in Salzberg was the result countless events going back thousands of years that resulted in settled society and writing arriving to Europe which allowed for specialized labor and then the free time and resources for someone to work on music and not on finding food. The “oh my god, the Africans were so dumb, why didn’t they write the Marriage of Figaro” is just so stupid. Until recent times, technology spread unevenly around the globe and the ability (and even possibility) of having settled society relies on the availability of resources, which include crops and animals, which were not uniformly distributed across the globe. People do the best they can with the resources they have.
Nicely done!
And I, too, like my racists and chauvinists to just come right out and say it. To wit: "It's idiotic to pretend that all cultures and civilizations are equal."(!)
He doesn't even need to state the standard in question. It's apparently the ability to expand and dominate, and to heap up wealth in a tiny number of hands, which hands then spend a small fraction of said wealth on the production of cultural refinements designed to celebrate domination, amuse the idle rich, and awe the benighted poor the world over. (Note: the best things about the European imperial tradition-- things like representative democracy and civil liberties-- were actually forced on it by threat of egalitarian revolutions against it!). There's no shortage of irony in a guy like adultinhistomb celebrating European civilizational superiority while railing against one of its main products: The idea of universal, natural, human equality. His "European civilization" apparently doesn't include the Enlightenment and all of its ideological offspring!
This post was edited 8 minutes after it was posted.
Reason provided:
Typo
The atomic bombs dropped on Japan killed over 200,000 people immediately and who knows how many died over time due to them.
It is speculation (propaganda really) to say they saved lives. If you think so, then why drop the 2nd bomb within 3 days of the first rather than letting the Japanese have time to surrender?
The bombs were air bursts and the long term deaths due to radiation were very low.
It's not speculation at all to say they saved lives. You should read a little about how the Battle of Okinawa went.
3 days was plenty of time to surrender.
The Japanese killed almost as many women and children in China with bayonets than people were killed in the atomic blasts. Your pity is misplaced.
Above are proof of more lies.
Can you ever say anything truthful about people who aren't white (rhetorical question)
Japan would have been firebombed constantly to finish the war if not for the nuclear weapons. Yes, the deaths were tragic, but it saved far more Japanese lives.
but to leftists Japanese are basically white so they don't count
So by killing civilians in Japan, the U.S. saved civilians in Japan.
SMH......
How about you not drop atomic bombs in the middle of major heavily populated cities?
It's an established fact that some slaves learned trades such as blacksmithing and then were able to use those skills to make a living after the emancipation.
How is that not relevant to the history if it happened?
It's possible to acknowledge this fact without making the leap that slavery was somehow a good thing.
Uh...there was this thing called chattel slavery in America. Apparently you didn't know that. Black people were property and their kids were property and their kids kids...which racist whites in the south wanted to continue forever. You do know they were forced to do whatever they were told or they were murdered right? Apparently not. American chattel slavery wasn't some jobs program.
Also why couldn't they learn to read and write....if slave masters were teaching skills?
There wasn't a single good thing about being a black slave in America and to try to come up with a reason says volumes about some racist white folks as they try to lie to change history. This is exactly why people are upset.
The only person who benefitted from slavery was the slave owner. But you continue to lie and say blacks were better off as property than free. No slave ever said that. Ever.
Stop lying
You're so dumb...
There was no "chattel slavery" AFTER THE EMANCIPATION.
I appreciate the uninhibited ethnocentrism. It’s refreshing, really.
Mozart was a genius. So was Newton. So was al-Khwarizmi, who, as you know, invented algebra. You know who else is really smart? Hunter gatherers who know their environments incredibly well and can survive efficiently off of what’s around them. That takes a lot of knowledge and intelligence.
Maybe if you had dropped Mozart off on the banks of the Sepik River in 1770, his genius brain could have helped him figure out how to survive. And maybe if you had sent a young Nandi tribesman to study music in Salzberg, he would have written Don Giovanni. We’ll never know. But smart (and dumb) people are all around.
The fact that Mozart was able to study and write music in Salzberg was the result countless events going back thousands of years that resulted in settled society and writing arriving to Europe which allowed for specialized labor and then the free time and resources for someone to work on music and not on finding food. The “oh my god, the Africans were so dumb, why didn’t they write the Marriage of Figaro” is just so stupid. Until recent times, technology spread unevenly around the globe and the ability (and even possibility) of having settled society relies on the availability of resources, which include crops and animals, which were not uniformly distributed across the globe. People do the best they can with the resources they have.
Nicely done!
And I, too, like my racists and chauvinists to just come right out and say it. To wit: "It's idiotic to pretend that all cultures and civilizations are equal."(!)
He doesn't even need to state the standard in question. It's apparently the ability to expand and dominate, and to heap up wealth in a tiny number of hands, which hands then spend a small fraction of said wealth on the production of cultural refinements designed to celebrate domination, amuse the idle rich, and awe the beknighted poor the world over. (Note: the best things about the European imperial tradition-- things like representative democracy and civil liberties-- were actually forced on it by threat of egalitarian revolutions against it!). There's no shortage of irony in a guy like adultinhistomb celebrating European civilizational superiority while railing again one of its main products: The idea of universal, natural, human equality. His "European civilization" apparently doesn't include the Enlightenment and all of its ideological offspring!
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
