General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsVP: There is no roundtable no lecture, no invitation we will accept to debate an undeniable fact.
Link to tweet
malaise
(296,085 posts)Fuck DeathSentence and his racists posse!
ZonkerHarris
(25,577 posts)FSogol
(47,623 posts)redeeming qualities?
ret5hd
(22,502 posts)FSogol
(47,623 posts)leftieNanner
(16,159 posts)And those white boots won't help him much near a forge.
lastlib
(28,259 posts)for that one, he's untrainable.
Diraven
(1,897 posts)I hear all slaves learned that in slave school
Hermit-The-Prog
(36,631 posts)Should be some wooden sailing ships still afloat and ready to go to someplace educational for them, such as Antarctica.
Trueblue1968
(19,251 posts)Last edited Tue Aug 1, 2023, 07:43 PM - Edit history (1)
whip whip and beat beat them. see if they like the physical part of what many slaves endured.
LetMyPeopleVote
(179,822 posts)Cha
(319,067 posts)he's putting VP Harris in the News Condemning Slavery while he's Defending it.
This will backfire bigly!
Cha
(319,067 posts)for Nothing.
OneGrassRoot
(23,953 posts)I just learned of this quote yesterday thanks to DUer, MyOwnPeace:
"With reasonable men, I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter, nor waste arguments where they will certainly be lost."
.......William Lloyd Garrison
Disaffected
(6,399 posts)Raven123
(7,794 posts)malaise
(296,085 posts)Hekate
(100,133 posts)Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)A bunch of white people got rich off of the near-free labor.
There were no redeeming qualities to slavery ... from the viewpoint of the slaves. From the viewpoint of the owners, there were some. That's why they fought for them.
I'm not defending slavery as an institution, of course, rather just making a pedantic observation that precision in language is important, so don't bite my head off please
ShazzieB
(22,582 posts)I totally get what you're saying. There were oodles of "redeeming qualities" to slavery for tons of white folks, and not just the enslavers themselves. A whole bunch of people got very rich off the international slave trade, for example.
People like DeSadist have to make up bogus "reasons" why it was supposedly beneficial for the enslaved in order to convince themselves that the whole thing was AOK.
I feel slightly nauseous after typing all that, so I will now take a break to catch up on the indictment news.
Wounded Bear
(64,323 posts)because it is a sysem designed to hoover money up the food chain to make the wealthy even wealthier while suppressing wages and denying basic benefits to the working class.
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)in a system involving literal race-based slavery, but yeah, same basic idea.
My point was that the term 'redeeming' involves a matter of perspective. The FL education guidelines are explicitly suggesting there were redeeming qualities to slavery ... for the slave. Which is bullshit of course.
Ergo, in the interest of rhetorical accuracy, I'd have preferred if the response from Harris' office addressed this detail. Slavery was a system with no redeeming qualities ... for the slave. Clearly 100% the case.
It's perhaps untoward to mention, but that system did have 'redeeming qualities' if you were NOT the slave, and not even to just the slave owner. It also had 'redeeming qualities' if you were the owner of a northern textile mill, leveraging lower prices on your raw materials to boost profits. It also had them if you were a consumer wanting to buy some cheap clothes made out of cotton.
Like I said, I was being pedantic
Wounded Bear
(64,323 posts)it is important to understand why such odious systems remain in place for so long. Somebody is profiting from it, economically or socially or psychologically. Gas, grass, or ass...nobody rides for free, eh?
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)I always thought it was funny ...
Renew Deal
(85,145 posts)Couldn't do better. That should be printed on DeSantis obituary after the part about him justifying slavery.
sanatanadharma
(4,089 posts)The slavery story, then and now, is a moral issue not an issue of facts or circumstances.
The fact is the sin of slavery, prima facie.
The small benefit to the few is not an ethical defense of slavery where generations of the many 'slaved' for the benefit of the few.
DeSantis and the moreRon cultists of the never-right are seeking to justify slavery and that is an ethically-empty and morally-mendacious malignancy.
dalton99a
(94,109 posts)Botany
(77,318 posts)End of story.
LetMyPeopleVote
(179,822 posts)Cha
(319,067 posts)TY
wnylib
(26,008 posts)Just call it what it is.
burrowowl
(18,494 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(179,822 posts)calimary
(90,017 posts)It's a real shame. She doesn't deserve it. We have a Vice President who's made history, and who historians will write about. It's the first time we've EVER had a woman who's "a heartbeat away from the Presidency." And she's doing a great job! Hasn't had a misstep yet. She's proof that the presidential ticket isn't, and shouldn't be, an all-male club. And it's about time. Considering that women now slightly outnumber men in America, it's WAAAAAAY past time.
Evolve Dammit
(21,774 posts)swong19104
(625 posts)White folks would be lining up to become slaves. Let's see them line up.
LetMyPeopleVote
(179,822 posts)calimary
(90,017 posts)Or give it fresh air and airtime so it can grow.
GreenWave
(12,640 posts)StClone
(11,869 posts)..being visible. She will be the face of the future Democratic Party and define herself before Billionaires spend a lot of money to make her into what they think.
Marcuse
(9,009 posts)halfulglas
(1,654 posts)Slavery to any new territories because that's what big business always does. When Britain and most other stable countries abolished slavery, there was desperate need to create new markets to sell "excess" slaves. Because enslaved people were valuable not only for their forced labor, they were a great source of wealth in the form of collateral for loans and selling "excess" slaves. The election of Lincoln meant that they would not be able to do that.
Wounded Bear
(64,323 posts)by the late 1700's there was a very active Abolitionist movement in the British Empire that would outlaw slavery in the Colonies by the early 19th Century. The Southern states got on the revolution band wagon to preserve their oppressive economic system for as long as possible.
Marcuse
(9,009 posts)The year 1772 was a watershed of sorts in the history of slavery-it might be called the beginning of its end, as the legal framework upon which slavery was based began to crumble, at least in England, beginning with the landmark decision in Somerset v. Stewart. James Somerset was a slave bought in Virginia by Charles Stewart, a Scots merchant and customs official with quite close Chesapeake ties. Stewart left Virginia for England in 1768, taking Somerset with him. In 1771, Somerset took his leave of Stewart and refused to return to a state of permanent servitude. He was soon arrested and imprisoned, but his case was taken up by Granville Sharp, an inveterate opponent to the institution of slavery as antithetical to the British constitution and English common law. In a decision handed down by William Murray, Baron (later Earl) of Mansfield and Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench, the court narrowly held that "a master could not seize a slave in England and detain him preparatory to sending him out of the realm to be sold" and that habeas corpus was a constitutional right available to slaves to forestall such seizure, deportation and sale because they were not chattel, or mere property, they were servants and thus persons invested with certain (but certainly limited) constitutional protections. Although Mansfield took great care to phrase his holding in such a way that it could not be used for a broader precedent in determining the legal status of slaves or their rights, it was widely perceived quite differently on both sides of the Atlantic: Many, including many slaves, understood Somerset to have effectively abolished slavery in England (Somerset himself believed so). Its impact was profound in the colonies as some slaves invoked it to seek their own freedom.http://www.ouramericanrevolution.org/index.cfm/page/view/m0149
haele
(15,394 posts)their slaves - or any free person, for that matter, other than English.
The whole reason Africans were brought over as slaves was because Europeans couldn't figure out how to effectively grow cotton, indigo, and rice - all of which had been grown successfully across the African continent (especially sub-Saharan) since before the Roman Empire.
Before slavery decimated communities, Africans were perfectly great boatmakers, leather, metal and woodworkers, weavers, and dyers in their own right for centuries. Along with being engineers, scientists, mathematicians, surgeons, poets, etc...
Besides, 17th century Irish slaves just couldn't handle the Southeast climate. That is, if they couldn't escape and manage to blend in with other Europeans in the major port cities, or set up with a new name in some holler further north near a Scottish emigree settlement and claim they were always free.
Haele
Wounded Bear
(64,323 posts)Solly Mack
(96,941 posts)markodochartaigh
(5,545 posts)African-Americans were brought here in chains, and now their descendants are the most reliable voting block to keep the Republicans from destroying democracy in the US.
Evolve Dammit
(21,774 posts)Girard442
(6,886 posts)...a debate with a person of bad intent.