Who?
Most of us have used the N-word at some point in our lives. We're no different that Deen in that regard.
Why did you write "cracker" and "n-word"? You are assigning different levels of offensiveness to them. The two words are equally offensive. Should have written "c-word" and "n-word".
What annoys me is all the politically-correct-bleed-heart liberals who say things like "White people cannot be the victims of racism." or "Only black people can be the victims of racism."
Fu#*ing bullshit.
This is Liberal Logic. Equality at it's best.
The difference is that crackers were not slaves.
The power of the insult comes from the imbalance of power.
toronto1111 wrote:
Most of us have used the N-word at some point in our lives. We're no different that Deen in that regard.
Most of us? I don't think so.
Jeantel said cracker because she was hungry, I mean look at the girl she needs a snack.
1865 wrote:
The difference is that crackers were not slaves.
You're right, in the 1800's in America whites were not slaves. Today, there are tens of thousands of slaves in America, mostly forced into prostitution after being trafficked to America, and darn near none of them are black. They are almost entirely white, Hispanic, or Asian.
And last time I checked, over 300,000 Americans died in the Civil War, nearly 100% of whom were white and none of whom owned slaves. A "thank you" from the black community is long overdo for this sacrifice, but I'll settle for just not being called a racial slang like cracker.
The people are referred to as cracker today were not slave owners. Blacks today were not slaves. Its all so stupid.
It's.
beached whale wrote:
Why did you write "cracker" and "n-word"? You are assigning different levels of offensiveness to them. The two words are equally offensive. Should have written "c-word" and "n-word".
Because if you say "c-word" most people are going to think of that word that rhymes with runt.
Dude, just say cracker or nigger. What's the big deal?
Will E wrote:
Because if you say "c-word" most people are going to think of that word that rhymes with runt.
Punt? Hunt? Bunt?
non racist white person wrote:
What annoys me is all the politically-correct-bleed-heart liberals who say things like "White people cannot be the victims of racism." or "Only black people can be the victims of racism."
Fu#*ing bullshit.
This is Liberal Logic. Equality at it's best.
What annoys me is idiots who have been trained by ignorant people to think all liberals think this or all liberals think that. Or that there even are people who identify with a label called "liberal."
I'd like a "liberal" helping of vanilla ice cream with my home made peach a cobbler, please.
"Liberal," is a good word. How did idiots like you turn it in to a pejorative? Oh, you were looking for people to hate.
I've never met a single person who has ever described themselves as a "liberal."
Of course, a conservatard Republicant like yourself wouldn't know that.
Time for you to back away from the conservative tv and radio hate mongering shows.
the word Slave comes from SLAVs which you guessed it were white.
The controlled media focus exclusively on the enslavement of Blacks. The impression is given that only Whites bear responsibility for enslaving Blacks and that only Blacks were slaves. In fact, Blacks in Africa engaged in extensive enslavement of their own kind. Slavery was endemic in Africa, with entire tribes being enslaved through conquest on a regular basis. When Arabic, Jewish and White slave traders arrived on the coast of sub-Saharan Africa, they seldom if ever had to travel inland and fight or pursue their quarry. They were met on the coast by Africans more than willing to sell slaves to them by the thousands. And in America, records show that Black slaves were owned, not just by a few wealthy Whites, but by free Blacks and by Cherokee Indians. In some cases, these Blacks and Indians even owned White slaves.
White slaves were actually owned by Blacks and Indians in the South to such an extent that the Virginia Assembly passed the following law in 1670: "It is enacted that no negro or Indian though baptized and enjoying their own freedom shall be capable of any such purchase of Christians." The records of the time reveal that free Blacks often owned Black slaves themselves. In 1717, it was proposed that a qualification for election to the South Carolina Assembly was to be "the ownership of one White man."
From 1609 until the early 1800s, between one half and two thirds of all the White colonists who came to the New World came as slaves. White slaves cleared the forests, drained the swamps, built the roads, sweated in the fields, and died like flies in hellish factories. Owned like property, they had no rights nor recourse to the law. Fugitive slave laws applied to them just as to Blacks if they should flee their masters. Black slaves were expensive, and though at times cruelly used, were not often used beyond the limits of human endurance. That would have been a waste of a costly investment. White slaves, however, consisting of the poor and unwanted "surplus population" of Britain, were available for nearly nothing, just a few pence for a thug to billyclub them and shanghai them aboard a westward-bound vessel. Thus they were expendable.
Both psychologically and materially Whites in modern times are called upon to bear burdens of guilt and monetary reparation for Black slavery. This position is based entirely on enforced ignorance and the deliberate suppression of the record of White slavery in North America.
A correct understanding of the authentic history of the enslavement of Whites in America could have profound consequences for the future. Most of the books on White labor in early America use words like "White indentured servitude," "White bondservants," White servants," etc. Few are now aware that the majority of these so-called "servants" were bound to a condition more properly called permanent chattel slavery unto death. The papers legally allowing the enslavement, called indentures, were often forged by kidnappers and press-gangs; and in cases where these papers did not literally specify a life term of servitude, the slave-owner had the legal right to unilaterally increase the length of the term on the flimsiest pretexts. The so-called "apprentices" or "indentured servants" had no say in the matter. These enslaved White people are, however, never called slaves by establishment academics and media spokesmen. To do so would destroy the myth of unique Black victimhood and universal White guilt.
Today, with the massive concentration of educational and media resources on the Black experience of slavery, the unspoken assumption has been that only Blacks have been enslaved to any degree or magnitude worthy of study or memorial. The historical record reveals that this is not the case, however. The word "slave" itself is derived from the word "slav," a reference to the Eastern European White people who, among others, were enslaved by their fellow Whites, by the Mongols, and by the Arabs over a period of many centuries.
According to Thomas Burton's Parliamentary Diary 1656-1659, in 1659 the English parliament debated the practice of selling British Whites into slavery in the New World. In the debate, these Whites were referred to not as "indentured servants" but as "slaves."
In the Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, America and West Indies of 1701, we read of a protest over the "encouragement to the spiriting away of Englishmen without their consent and selling them for slaves, which hath been a practice very frequent and known by the name of kidnapping." In the British West Indies, plantation slavery was instituted as early as 1627. In Barbados by the 1640s there were an estimated 25,000 slaves, of whom 21,700 were White.
This document records that while White slaves were worked to death, as they cost next to nothing, there were Caribbean Indians brought from Guiana to help propagate native foodstuffs who were well-treated and received as free persons by the wealthy planters.
The Englishman William Eddis, after observing White slaves in America in the 1770s wrote: "Generally speaking, they groan beneath a worse than Egyptian bondage." Governor Sharpe of the Maryland colony compared the property interest of the planters in their White slaves, with the estate of an English farmer consisting of a "Multitude of Cattle."
There is a history of White people that has never been told in any coherent form, largely because most modern historians have, for reasons of politics or psychology, refused to recognize White slaves in America as just that.
Today, not a tear is shed for the sufferings of millions of our enslaved forefathers. 200 years of White slavery in America have been almost completely obliterated from the collective memory of the American people. Writer Elaine Kendall asks "Who wants to be reminded that half - perhaps as many as two-thirds - of the original American colonists came here, not of their own free will, but kidnapped, shanghaied, impressed, duped, beguiled, and yes, in chains - ?...we tend to gloss over it... we'd prefer to forget the whole sorry chapter."
'scuse me? Over 600,000 died in that war. Having said that, it was a shame because it was not a "civil" war and never should have been fought.
beached whale wrote:
And last time I checked, over 300,000 Americans died in the Civil War, nearly 100% of whom were white and none of whom owned slaves.
