Quantcast

Facts and Fallacies About Slavery/Discrimination In The USA

Latti Ice Ganga Gangsta of PHAET 2013/05/26 05:45:00
I agree; here is my opinion on the matter
I disagree; this is my opinion on the matter
You!
Add Photos & Videos
1) Native Americans were the first slaves in the Americas and the Caribbeans.

Example:




2) There were mostly European Indentured servants in the U.S. ( Mostly Scottish and Irish), during the late 1400's to early 1600's. People wonder why this isn't taught.

There are quite a few reasons why White indentured servants is skipped over.

A) Since Whites were collectively deemed the superior race by the 50's in the U.S/globally by pseudo Scientists and Anthropologists; to them, teaching this portion of history would conflict with their theories. After all; the inferior race are Negroes, and they are only deemed into servitude.

By that time; The Irish, Scottish and Italians were deemed White. Many of our U.S presidents were from Scottish, Irish and Italian descent.




3) Many of the Irish were shipped to North America and the Caribbean, due to false claims of crime,

Example:




Once the Irish were no longer considered a cross between Negroid and Caucasian (Both B.S Terms), the owners decided they didn't like nor wanted the continuous of Irish and West African people having relations. A hierarchy was now put into place; before Eastern and Southern Europeans were seen as dirty, stupid and lazy compared to Anglo-Saxons. When the ruling Social Elites realized, they could make a unified front on Whiteness (During the great migration of Eastern/Southern/Northern European migration), they proceeded to make the census.

Europeans, North Africans, and The Middle East were deemed White. They were now the top of the hierarchy. This is why many North Africans proclaimed that Saharan Africans were never the original people of North Africa, or contributed to its' creation. That is why many Scientists/Anthropologists deemed the Egyptians as being White. That is why those same people deemed Ethiopians as dark Caucasians. Basically, any civilization that pivoted the Human race forward was deemed Caucasian. Saharan Africans and anyone of African descent was deemed inferior and could never intermingle with the higher race.

This is extremely complex; notice how most of it doesn't make any sense, but this is how these imbeciles thought back then. North Africans are people of Saharan African descent, and later mixed with Middle Eastern Arabs, and different European groups. But I shall continue; this perception was carried out globally.

North Africans believed Saharan Africans were inferior and tried to wiped them out of history texts. In South America; Mexico tried to erase the fact that their first President and Vice President were half West African.



In Cuba; one of their Revolutionary heroes was Black, Antonio Maceo Grajales. (Cuba's Independence from Spain) White Anthropologists lightened portraits and illustrations of him; deeming him to be purely White European. After Cuba's independence from Spain; they were united ethnically. The illusion and artificial conception of race eluded them. Joe Marti stated he wasn't going to fall for Spain's racial games and stated "Cuba for Cuban's".



Fast forward to when Bastisa was president; American/European ideals on race spread globally. Although Bastisa was of African descent himself; he created laws to make life harder for Cuban's of predominantly African descent. He allowed Anthropologist to claim Antonio was purely White European, he allowed the immigration to solely White Europeans into Cuba. The racial illusion was so bad, that 97% of Cubans who immigrated to the U.S identified themselves as White.


In the Dominican Republic; president Rafael Trujillo, declared anyone who admitted they were Black would be imprisoned or killed. In a island where about 90% of their citizens were heavily of African descent. Trujillo's himself; his grandmother being Haitian. He openly stated he was inspired by Hitler's vision of racial purity and superiority. He permed his hair religiously, determined to not let any signs of his African roots show on his face. To him; advancing the Dominican Republic, meant Whitening it up.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-13560512

This concept happened in Brazil, Argentina, Columbia, etc, again globally. Someone asked a question on here previously, "Why is Black slavery so important or why the lack of focus on other forms of slavery?" The answer should be obvious; it isn't the 300 years of slavery that makes what people of African descent history uniquely different; it is all that came afterwords. The Jim Crow laws, being seen as the race at the bottom, a hybrid between Ape and Human as Darwin stated. The fact that people of African descent was put in zoos with apes/monkeys. Many committing suicide after, while hundreds of people previously watching; not saying anything.

This happening in the Bronx: http://mentalfloss.com/article/30399/1906-bronx-zoo-put-black...

The experiments, like the Tuskegee sterilization; giving Syphilis to Black men. Most dying and passing the disease to their wives; only three men survived. Eugenics and experimentation. Being erased from the history books and having every facet of your identity and heritage taken away; from ancient to modern. Having Black face, and other propaganda programs broadcast globally; from Japan to Egypt.



http://www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/dissent/documents/AIDS/

Yes; almost every ethnic group has gone through trials and tribulations, being lied about, slavery, etc, in one point or another. Pertaining to those of African descent; not the same duration and to be hit from every aspect as once. I can't say other ethnic groups have gone through that. If so, I would like for someone to enlighten me.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4p2957.html

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/why-is-only-black-slave...

The fact remains; if Society had let go of its bigotry towards those of African descent; like they did with the Scottish, Irish, etc, we all wouldn't be so polarized by the illusion of race. We wouldn't even be having this conversation.

4) Indentured servants only worked for a certain amount of years and were free, to be on their own, when their contract was up.

5) There were free people of African descent in America, before the Atlantic slave trade started.

6) Some people of African descent owned other people of African descent; over 99.9% did so, because it guaranteed their enslaved relatives safety. Free Negroes (term for historical purposes) bought their relatives for protection.

Example:

http://www.vvdailypress.com/articles/later-33884-justice-year...
http://books.google.com/books?id=ptFqye_hg54C&pg;=PA76&lpg;=P...

  • After Peyton Polly, his brother, and his son were freed in Kentucky, his brother purchased Peyton’s seven other sons and daughters. Evidently this tactic was common. The reunited family moved to Ohio, a free state, for safety. Three years later armed White men from Kentucky kidnapped the children, ages 4-17. Peyton could not risk going after the men himself. He put his trust in the legal system, and eventually the intervention of many Ohio politicians managed to free four of the children. Virginia refused to free the others, who remained enslaved for over a decade until 'The Emancipation Proclamation" was passed.
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • no no 2014/08/03 13:42:15
    I agree; here is my opinion on the matter
    no no
    Revisionist History Online

    Film Review: Master and Commander: A Valuable Fable

    Black Men Say Confederate Flag Flies for Freedom

    What About Black Skin Privilege?

    The Forgotten Slaves: Whites in Servitude in Early America and Industrial Britain

    A Black Woman Upholds Confederate Heritage

    Cinque, the Black Hero of Spielberg's "Amistad," Was Himself a Slave-Trader

    Of White Slaves and Great Holocaust Trials: Hoffman's Fact-Finding and Research Trip to Great Britain, Sept. 9-24, 1997

    Outrage as Black Reporter says 'Thank God for Slavery'

    Those Misunderstood Puritans

    A Separatist Thanksgiving


    If any links are not functioning, visit RevisionistHistory.org for updates and our latest site map

    RevisionistHistory.org
  • Will Advocate of PHAET 2014/07/29 17:56:55
    I agree; here is my opinion on the matter
    Will Advocate of  PHAET
    +1
    As always, very informative. Thanks, Lattie!
  • corey 2014/07/29 03:22:58 (edited)
    I agree; here is my opinion on the matter
    corey
    +2
    Good, the information is solid, but I think you should state the elephant in the room, Whites were not slaves during the Trans Atlantic slave trade. Remember why you're explaining this information, it's to show people the history of at least this country and the motivations behind why slavery happened. You can't really do that if you don't plainly state the obvious. I know it seems like it's obvious, but if you leave any part of history "up for debate" it will undoubtedly be reconstructed into lies. One last critique: you didn't mention that the Native Americans were black, is there a reason why you didn't? Remember the first people in the west were blacks, they mixed with Asians at a later time which gave rise to the Native Americans as we know them today.
  • Latti I... corey 2014/07/29 13:47:04 (edited)
    Latti Ice Ganga Gangsta of PHAET
    +3
    Corey; people should already know the migration of African people out of Africa, and yes I made this post to show the difference. Yes, White people were not slaves in the Americas.
  • Sixguns... Latti I... 2014/07/31 20:54:27
    Sixguns Magee
    EXCUSE ME??????????You have too be out of your mind. The first recorded slaves were Irish,not Scottish. I research national archives not books written by leftist communist democrats! Your information has very limited truth and validation and I could crush it.............So before you begin on a debate with your one sided liberal history tell me this.

    Who were the first Native Americans which is recorded and now coming to light. I suggest you research a great deal more before making some of the comments you have. Anyone can cut and paste bias from the internet.
  • Latti I... Sixguns... 2014/07/31 21:28:57
    Latti Ice Ganga Gangsta of PHAET
    The first slaves in the Americas were different Native American groups, the Irish were sent here eventuality as indentured servants. They weren't slaves; secondly, Corey and I are talking about the "Out of Africa Theory.".

    There are quite a few things coming to light:

  • Sixguns... Latti I... 2014/07/31 21:42:05
    Sixguns Magee
    +2
    The Irish were not indentured servants at all,they were victims of Kidnap and forced slavery well before America was even called America. The truth has been hidden and is coming fourth...........now the Irish Archives and even the ones hidden in D.C. and the Masonic capital in Philly are allowing the truth to be told.

    Again the indentured servant drivel that has been regurgitated over the years is B.S. When I get the time I will forward some solid links as I see you are passionate and educated and you seem to really care about truthful history!

    Lets see if you can handle it lol
  • no no corey 2014/07/29 21:02:56
    no no
    +1
    There were white slaves, and there were blacks who owned both black and white slaves. and native Americans were not black.The DNA studies prove that they migrated from Asia.
  • Latti I... no no 2014/07/29 21:23:09
  • corey no no 2014/08/03 00:22:48
    corey
    +1
    LOL, No, There were no White slaves in America ever. You are correct on blacks owning others blacks, although I would like to make clear the vast majority of black "freemen" were "mulattoes" not actually Blacks. (derogatory term for bi-racial) I used this term so you understand how they felt about them. Also, the Native Americans do have blood that comes from Asia, but understand it's because the aboriginals (blacks) to the west mixed with the invading Asians. Look up the Folsom or Olmec people to see the culture of the aboriginals to the west and how their culture was influenced and changed by the Asians. The original Native Americans are black. The only reason you think they're Asian or Pseudo Caucasians is because of the way we teach history, mostly focusing on the 5 "civilized" tribes of North America. The 5 "civilized" tribes are known because they adopted European culture the most, and were known to mix with Europeans heavily.
  • no no corey 2014/08/03 04:34:29 (edited)
    no no
    You are incorrect. dig deeper into the history of this country.


    The Enslavement of Whites in Early America and Industrial Britain

    and Ancillary Studies in American History

    Based on Michael A. Hoffman II's landmark book:

    They Were White and They Were Slaves

    The Untold History of the Enslavement of Whites in Early America


    "Being too short of stature to reach his work standing on the floor, he was placed on a block; but this expedient only remedied a part of the evil, for he was not able by any possible exertion to keep pace with the machinery. In vain the ...child declared it was not in his power to move quicker. He was beaten by the overlooker with great severity and cursed and reviled from morning 'till night, 'till his life became a burthen to him and his body discoloured with bruises."

    A Memoir of Robert Blincoe, An Orphan Boy, Sent from the Workhouse at St. Pancras, London at 7 Years of Age to Endure the Horrors of a Cotton Mill [Manchester: J. Doherty, 1832]


    "I'm weak and young and frightened oft, when the dark flue I see; by blows and threats forced up aloft,
  • corey no no 2014/08/04 01:44:29
    corey
    +1
    LOL. You're insinuating that because some whites were treated badly (mainly Irish) that they were slaves. Read this carefully: There were no white slaves in America. The white slaves your supposedly talking about were indentured servants. Slavery you were born into based off your mother (if she was of African descent). There was no time limit for your enslavement. You're using accounts of mistreatment to suggest that was slavery, but it's not. I, nor any one explaining that there were no white slaves, has ever said that certain whites weren't treated badly during early America. We stated the truth, there isn't and never has been white slaves in America. You are part of the group of people trying to show how certain whites were treated in this country in the beginning, but you're going about it the wrong way, lying about something as serious as slavery. Indentured servants had its horrors, no one is arguing that. The thing we're explaining to people like you is, indentured servants had rights and were generally treated better than slaves, if for no other reason, they could sue where as slaves weren't even considered human, much less allowed to participate in society's legal proceedings.
  • no no corey 2014/08/04 10:57:49
    no no
    You missed the point,
  • no no corey 2014/08/03 04:48:07 (edited)
    no no
    Having know a black family whose ancestors owned both black and white slavea, and has nothing to do with the premise you promulgate, I will accept the first hand knowledge. This however is quoted material. White Slaves and Black Slaveowners in America Just do a bit more research.
    stopmediabias posted on Jul 27, 2008 | views: 1088 | Tags: Obama, race, slavery

    What is NOT taught about history in schools. For starters for more id depth research.


    I found this article interesting and when I actually dug deeper I found some interesting things you probably were never taught in public school, I know I wasn't. There were times the history of our country where white slaves were taken from foreign countries, imprisoned on a boat, sent over here to America and sold into slavery. Here is quote from the above article:

    "If anything, Jordan and Walsh offer an explanation of how the structures of slavery - black or white - were entwined in the roots of American society. They refrain from drawing links to today, except to remind readers that there are probably tens of millions of Americans who are descended from white slaves without even knowing it."

    I was surprised to discover previously that at one time in this country there were more black slave owners than white. Now to discover that there...
    Having know a black family whose ancestors owned both black and white slavea, and has nothing to do with the premise you promulgate, I will accept the first hand knowledge. This however is quoted material. White Slaves and Black Slaveowners in America Just do a bit more research.
    stopmediabias posted on Jul 27, 2008 | views: 1088 | Tags: Obama, race, slavery

    What is NOT taught about history in schools. For starters for more id depth research.


    I found this article interesting and when I actually dug deeper I found some interesting things you probably were never taught in public school, I know I wasn't. There were times the history of our country where white slaves were taken from foreign countries, imprisoned on a boat, sent over here to America and sold into slavery. Here is quote from the above article:

    "If anything, Jordan and Walsh offer an explanation of how the structures of slavery - black or white - were entwined in the roots of American society. They refrain from drawing links to today, except to remind readers that there are probably tens of millions of Americans who are descended from white slaves without even knowing it."

    I was surprised to discover previously that at one time in this country there were more black slave owners than white. Now to discover that there were also white people who were slaves and in some cases owned by black slave owners this puts a different perspective on the whole debate about race and prejudice in this country"
    (more)
  • corey no no 2014/08/04 02:43:39
    corey
    +1
    Wrong. LOL, even in the source you provided the whites are called indentured servants. The author of the source you are referring to is trying to claim there is no such thing as indentured servitude, but we all know that's a lie. Their reasoning for why it should have been designated as slavery is because many of them didn't survive to the end of their contract. Once again, the reason that wasn't slavery is because one, they signed to take on those burdens and they had rights for which they could take their oppressors to court, and yes this right was infringed upon, but they had rights for which there was legal proceedings to protect them. In other words, their rights were infringed upon, but there were no such rights for slaves. Again the people you're talking about were indentured servants. You are correct though, there were both black and white indentured servants. Again, if you knew anything about history you would know slavery grew out of indentured servitude. Again though, there were never any white slaves. There were plenty of white indentured servants, and that's why the practice was cut out. Too many indentured servants were coming and finishing their contracts and gaining land, money, clothes... in short equity (financial). That's why they switched over to slavery ...
    Wrong. LOL, even in the source you provided the whites are called indentured servants. The author of the source you are referring to is trying to claim there is no such thing as indentured servitude, but we all know that's a lie. Their reasoning for why it should have been designated as slavery is because many of them didn't survive to the end of their contract. Once again, the reason that wasn't slavery is because one, they signed to take on those burdens and they had rights for which they could take their oppressors to court, and yes this right was infringed upon, but they had rights for which there was legal proceedings to protect them. In other words, their rights were infringed upon, but there were no such rights for slaves. Again the people you're talking about were indentured servants. You are correct though, there were both black and white indentured servants. Again, if you knew anything about history you would know slavery grew out of indentured servitude. Again though, there were never any white slaves. There were plenty of white indentured servants, and that's why the practice was cut out. Too many indentured servants were coming and finishing their contracts and gaining land, money, clothes... in short equity (financial). That's why they switched over to slavery from which whites were excluded. What ever story you were told about blacks owning whites is a lie. Once again, it is true that blacks did own other blacks, but the predominant majority who owned blacks were bi-racial people, also there was never a time when black or bi-racial people owned more slaves than whites. There may have been more black or bi-racial people who owned more slaves than whites in a certain town or area, but never overall. Understand that this is important because only 4 to 5 percent of the south's population owned slaves. (A last bit of information for you. Many of the blacks and bi-racial people who owned slaves owned there own family members. This was a common practice to keep the whites from abusing them, or to protect them from someone white just wondering around picking up "freeman" and claiming them as their "runaway" slaves.) Again, There never were and has never been white slaves in America.
    (more)
  • no no corey 2014/08/04 10:56:54
    no no
    You are still using blinders. The referenced source was just thrown in for good measure. As I said, I know the descendants of a black family that owned both black and white slaves. I've seen the records, facts, photos, etc. And had the unusual opportunity to talk with two former slaves that could verify this information. There were slaves, both black and white, and there were some indentured servants who were black. Lacy Gates b. 1845 d. in 1943 and Jim Gates b. 1852 d. 1950. Lou Ann who was white was enslaved along with several other whites with Lacy and Jim. As you dig deeper, grow older and more knowledgeable as your experience. of the history of slavery, its consequences, and how so much was omitted, left out, changed and swept under the rug so to speak,,perhaps your .will have a different perspective. You just might be surprised to know that as late as 1966, an extended family who were descendants of enslaved blacks was located that still lived in a rural isolated area on a plantation, and only one, the oldest male in the group, spoke English, while the others spoke an African dialect. ut that is another story. Just mentioned to help you to understand that there is abundant amount of informaiton that you are not aware of.
  • corey no no 2014/08/05 00:13:15 (edited)
    corey
    Wow, just wow. You just keep lying don't you. You do realize slavery in America ended 149 years ago? That would make your story of having talked to a former slave a bunch of bull. Your statement, "the unusual opportunity to talk with two former slaves that could verify this information". That is a straight up lie. You may have spoken with some Black people who were feeling the effects of black codes right after slavery, but it would be literally impossible for you to have spoken with someone who was an actual slave. This plus your assertion of this mythical black family who owned black and white slaves is also a pack of lies. Again, one of the requirements to be a slave was if your mother was of African descent, seeing as no white person's mother is of African descent, they could not be slaves. What you are more than likely referring to are Bi-racial people who were light enough to pass, but they were born to a mother of African descent, so they were kept in slavery. There never were nor has there ever been white slaves in America. Second, I am well aware that there were both black and white indentured servants. I told you once before indentured servitude was not color restricted, only slavery was. You are correct though, there are plenty of things in history that has been swept under the rug, but this mythical "white" slaves crap isn't one of them. There never were nor has there ever been white slaves in America.
  • no no corey 2014/08/05 01:05:41
    no no
    Go back and read the dates of birth and dates of death Lacy, Jim, which would make Lou Ann about the same age. . Can you count. I know with whom i talked. . . You are still way off base. Hopefully, as I have suggested , you will do a bit more research. And I know the descendants of the family who owned black and white slaves And i have met another gentleman who was white that was born in 1864 to enslaved white parents. His youngest daughter was born in 1935. and she and I are great friends. The family is not mixed, they are white. But before you call someone alier , do your simple arithmetic.
  • corey no no 2014/08/05 23:26:08
    corey
    Stop lying and getting your sources from books meant to show the horrors of slavery instead of the requirements of slavery. You keep saying this nonsense of white slaves. Once again, that is a straight up lie. There never were nor has there ever been any white slaves in America. I have done plenty of research on slavery and it's after effects. There is no evidence of any white slaves. The only "evidence" that shows this is bi-racial people who looked white, but were born to a mother of African descent, which makes them mixed raced not white. White people never were enslaved in America. Also by your account of the white man who was in "slavery", you're telling me the guy had his youngest daughter at 71? Because that's how old he would have to have been when he had her. Now I'm not saying it's not possible, but highly unlikely. Once again, your "friends" are more than likely referring to their ancestors who had indentured servants. I say this because again, it is the only practice that allowed for both black and white people to be contracted for a period of subjugation. Slavery on the other hand was restricted to the black "race" in America.
  • no no corey 2014/08/06 00:34:40
    no no
    Just as you did not admit about the dates, you have difficulty admitting other facts. The late great black historian, John Hope Franklin and many others would disagree with your assumptions. And as far as the history, facts and myths of slavery, as I said having had conversations with two former slaves, and still a good friends of the daughter of a white male baby born into slavery, and knowing that she, and her family are white, I also knew her father who died in 1954, I have forgotten more about slavery that you know in your short life time. So to conclude a "going no where with this exchange" I leave you with Alexander Pope: " A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian Spring" I wish you well, and much success with your studies.
  • corey no no 2014/08/08 01:09:23 (edited)
    corey
    I don't mean to be rude, but you seem to be stuck on stupid. You keep ignoring the fact that slavery was based on your mother in America. If your mother was of *African descent* you were a slave. On top of the fact that whites were excluded from the practice. Once again, whatever you've been told is a lie. The people you're talking about might be white today, but the only way their ancestors were slaves in America was if they were black or bi-racial then. Again, I'm not giving you anecdotal evidence as you're giving me, I'm telling you the actual laws and practices. You can claim all you want that whites were "slaves" in America, but there is nothing that backs up your ravings. Also, stop referencing people when you're miss representing what they were talking about and sometimes fighting against. Example: John Hope Franklin like many others, refer to the history of whites not always being unified against blacks, usually citing periods of whites who enslaved other whites. But understand they are not talking about their history in America. The only thing they usually refer or referred to in America about whites, was Indentured servitude. They talked about indentured servitude because they wanted to show how white people felt about people they just felt weren't white enough like ...
    I don't mean to be rude, but you seem to be stuck on stupid. You keep ignoring the fact that slavery was based on your mother in America. If your mother was of *African descent* you were a slave. On top of the fact that whites were excluded from the practice. Once again, whatever you've been told is a lie. The people you're talking about might be white today, but the only way their ancestors were slaves in America was if they were black or bi-racial then. Again, I'm not giving you anecdotal evidence as you're giving me, I'm telling you the actual laws and practices. You can claim all you want that whites were "slaves" in America, but there is nothing that backs up your ravings. Also, stop referencing people when you're miss representing what they were talking about and sometimes fighting against. Example: John Hope Franklin like many others, refer to the history of whites not always being unified against blacks, usually citing periods of whites who enslaved other whites. But understand they are not talking about their history in America. The only thing they usually refer or referred to in America about whites, was Indentured servitude. They talked about indentured servitude because they wanted to show how white people felt about people they just felt weren't white enough like the Irish. They did this to highlight the way whites use to see the Irish. A second point of this was to show that if they could change their attitudes on the Irish, it's possible for them to change their attitudes on blacks. This should have been pretty obvious, if you actually read or paid attention to what these black historians said, but I guess if you skimmed and/or half listened when they gave speeches you would miss interpret it. I'm also getting bored with this strawman argument that older people tend to resort to when they have been cornered. You being older does not make you smarter than someone. The amount of information coupled with facts that support your assertions is what makes someone smarter (at least on said subject) than someone else. Once again, there were none nor were there ever any white slaves in America.
    (more)
  • no no corey 2014/08/08 02:19:29 (edited)
    no no
    I have former graduate students who have produced more research, thesis and dissertations, than you have been exposed to in your short life time. And I knew John Hope Franklin personally, and you are simply off base. Many of my former colleagues and students have been following this exchange and they have suggested that I take another course of action and end this. .If you would take some time, and read what you write, get an ah ha moment, perhaps it would be helpful. But no, far from it I'm not stuck on stupid.
  • corey no no 2014/08/08 03:55:20
    corey
    Once again, yes you are stuck on stupid. Let me make this simple for you. You stated there were "white" slaves in America. To promote your assertion you yourself referenced sources that call the suppose it "white" slaves, indentured servants. Then you insinuate that you have met white people who have parents that were "enslaved". Yet, your time frame for your little story doesn't match up. Let's look at your story. Your suppose it white friend would have been 71 when he had his youngest daughter. Once again, not impossible, but highly unlikely. Then you claim you have black friends who's ancestors owned black and white slaves. I have already stated the laws and practices of early America, and explained why a portrait they may own looks the way it does. That is of course assuming they have some visual proof of their accusation. The people their talking about may have been passing, but understand that makes them black, they simply look closer to white than black. Again, they were kept in slavery because they were born to a mother of African descent. Your "story" has so many holes it's sad. Also, these dissertations you refer to, did they make the claim that there were "white" slaves, or did they assert the idea that indentured servitude should be reclassified as slavery? I know...
    Once again, yes you are stuck on stupid. Let me make this simple for you. You stated there were "white" slaves in America. To promote your assertion you yourself referenced sources that call the suppose it "white" slaves, indentured servants. Then you insinuate that you have met white people who have parents that were "enslaved". Yet, your time frame for your little story doesn't match up. Let's look at your story. Your suppose it white friend would have been 71 when he had his youngest daughter. Once again, not impossible, but highly unlikely. Then you claim you have black friends who's ancestors owned black and white slaves. I have already stated the laws and practices of early America, and explained why a portrait they may own looks the way it does. That is of course assuming they have some visual proof of their accusation. The people their talking about may have been passing, but understand that makes them black, they simply look closer to white than black. Again, they were kept in slavery because they were born to a mother of African descent. Your "story" has so many holes it's sad. Also, these dissertations you refer to, did they make the claim that there were "white" slaves, or did they assert the idea that indentured servitude should be reclassified as slavery? I know this is hard to hear, but here's a bit of advice from a young man, stop citing or insinuating that because people write thesis and or dissertations on various things that the information is solid or credible. You're an older person correct? Then you should remember the attempt to reclassify the original Egyptians as white and the original Hebrews as white. These attempts had thesis and dissertations from well established college educated people written about them as well. So you have to excuse me if I don't see the ethos of those college students and professors as upstanding as you do. Understand, the phrase "stuck on stupid" means doing the same thing over and over expecting a different outcome. In other words, insane. You want me to believe there were "white" slaves in America when there is absolutely no evidence to suggest it. If that is not stuck on stupid, then nothing is. Once more, there never were nor has there ever been white slaves in America.
    (more)
  • no no corey 2014/08/08 07:56:30 (edited)
    no no
    I. The article was not presented as proof, only as a source for reading. I Did not realize at the time that I had encountered an individual who thought that what they knew was all they needed to know.
    Summing up what I wrote and there is no contradiction.

    2. Lacy Gates was born in 1845 and died in 1943
    3. Jim Gates was born in 1852 and died in 1950
    I knew both of them, also Jim's sister Ella, her three sons and daughter And I know their families.
    4. Lou Ann who was white was enslaved with them and had a son that i will call here, TT, since the real name might be recognized by others who read this.
    5. TT was born in 1864 and married twice. His older children were born in the 1890's and his youngest daughter from his first marriage was born in 1897. After his first wife died, he married a young woman who was born the same year as is one of his daughters. The children from his first marriage married have descendants scattered across the country. Some of which I have met and some of which i know from attending the family reunions. They are white, not 'mixed".
    6. From TT's second marriage six children were born,, a daughter in 1925, son , 1928, son 1930, son 1931, daughter, 1934 and daughter 1935. I know all of them. I attend their family reunions, and the information is verified...





    I. The article was not presented as proof, only as a source for reading. I Did not realize at the time that I had encountered an individual who thought that what they knew was all they needed to know.
    Summing up what I wrote and there is no contradiction.

    2. Lacy Gates was born in 1845 and died in 1943
    3. Jim Gates was born in 1852 and died in 1950
    I knew both of them, also Jim's sister Ella, her three sons and daughter And I know their families.
    4. Lou Ann who was white was enslaved with them and had a son that i will call here, TT, since the real name might be recognized by others who read this.
    5. TT was born in 1864 and married twice. His older children were born in the 1890's and his youngest daughter from his first marriage was born in 1897. After his first wife died, he married a young woman who was born the same year as is one of his daughters. The children from his first marriage married have descendants scattered across the country. Some of which I have met and some of which i know from attending the family reunions. They are white, not 'mixed".
    6. From TT's second marriage six children were born,, a daughter in 1925, son , 1928, son 1930, son 1931, daughter, 1934 and daughter 1935. I know all of them. I attend their family reunions, and the information is verified by the 1940 Census.
    7. They are not mixed, TT's father was white, Lou Ann, his mother was white, Lou Ann was enslaved on the same plantation where Lacy and Jim were, that was how my original connection to the family was made. There were other white individuals who were also enslaved on the same plantation. A I checked with some family members to make sure my dates were accurate, before I wrote this reply, the only error I made is that TT did not die in 1954. He was born in August of 1864 and died, not in 1954 as i previously wrote, but on October 18, 1951. his second wife died in 1970.
    8. I knew TT, although only about a year old when slavery ended, he could relate stories told to him by his mother and others. Jim,Lacy and Lou Ann remained friends throughout their lives. What you fail to realize, is that my generation is the last to have been around long enough to have, not read about slavery, but to have sat around and talked with those who lived during and just a few years after slavery. A foster family I lived with at one time, the mother was born in 1899 and died in 1990, and her mother was born in 11/23 /1873 and died 4/26/1950 and her father was born 4/3/1869 and died 8/7/1933 from diabetes. The history is there, not all from any books, just from those who lived it.
    9. The family of Lou Ann is composed of descendants of enslaved white individuals, not indentured servants as many would like to portray. The history, records, manifests and DNA facts speaks for themselves. The family does not hide its history. nor its heritage. There are other descendants of enslaved whites across this country as well, this is not an isolated case.

    10.You make definitive statements about a situation that I have first hand knowledge about as thought you were there and can refute it by simply continuing to say that it could not have happened. The consistent and redundant application of your understanding about enslaved and indentured individuals does not magically make it true, especially when there are descendants who have documents and are living proof to the
    contrary.
    (more)
  • jubil8 BN-0 PON 2014/07/28 02:53:02
    I agree; here is my opinion on the matter
    jubil8 BN-0 PON
    +3
    Great stuff, Latti. I'm going to save it. You've done a heck of a lot of work here.
  • Latti I... jubil8 ... 2014/07/28 03:01:44
    Latti Ice Ganga Gangsta of PHAET
    +2
    Thank you J :-).
  • Xerxes 2014/07/28 02:18:36
    I agree; here is my opinion on the matter
    Xerxes
    +3
    I am living proof of racism, half of my face is acid scars. A minor politicians son (small town in S. GA) "accidentally" threw acid out the window of his pick-up, was a arrested and given 6 months house arrest. Could not sue the boy own nothing everything in daddy's name
  • spiritgal33 2013/10/28 04:19:23
    I agree; here is my opinion on the matter
    spiritgal33
    +4
    I have known a good majority of this for many years..its a shame others don't and even more shameful that i and other democrata are being called kkk members and being blamed for slavory which makes no since at all since the mainstream of democrats like me are for equality for all and the protection of the environment...thank you for posting this its a very good read and im going to reshare it.
  • Latti I... spiritg... 2013/10/28 04:20:45
    Latti Ice Ganga Gangsta of PHAET
    +2
    Thanks. ^_^
  • spiritg... Latti I... 2013/10/28 04:22:17
    spiritgal33
    +2
    I shared it on facebook as well i thought it was that good.
  • Latti I... spiritg... 2013/10/28 04:23:47
  • Hotcho spiritg... 2013/10/28 18:24:31
    Hotcho
    That may be true, But as far as History and the democrats are concerned they have a dubious history concerning Slavery, and they like to blame it all on those evil Wepubwicans..Remember , it was a Republican President who freed the slaves and fought tooth and nail to do son the tumultuous mid-1800s, right before the Civil War, some political activists were concerned about keeping slavery from spreading into new western territories, and they saw no way to stop it through existing political powers: the Democrats and the Whigs (the pro-Congress party of the mid 1800s that largely destroyed itself in the 1852 elections in a battle over slavery).

    So they formed a new party, taking the name "Republicans" in a salute to earlier American politicians.

    By 1861, they had their first president: Abraham Lincoln. Soon after, slavery fell. The Whig party disappeared. And the Republicans began a long steady rise in power...and this from CNN a largely democratic news organizationhttp://www.cnn.co... demonization democrats need a History lesson
  • Latti I... Hotcho 2013/10/28 18:48:19
    Latti Ice Ganga Gangsta of PHAET
    +4
    One correction; Abraham Lincoln didn't free the slaves, they freed themselves because he wasn't going to do it in the first place. In addition; about 20 years before the civil war, Black freed themselves in places like Florida and gained emancipation. Most abolitionists were also Black.

    As for racism; both parties are to blame and the general at large for falling for a tool that was just created for division. Because different races doesn't exist.
  • Hotcho Latti I... 2013/10/28 20:50:02
    Hotcho
    Interesting theory, How do you free yourself and then get hanged by a bunch of Klu Klux Klan members, and as for both parties holding the blame. It is the the democrats who continually tried to keep blacks on a short lease and they still do it today, By catering to them , because they really don't believe in them however Republicans get the blame for being the blue meanies here..You think Pelosi or Ried are going to actually tell you what they really believe about black people. They never will..they just want them in their back pocket so as to get their vote..It's like, I'm going to talk nice to you, and I'm going to give you everything you want, you don't have to work for it..Just keep voting for me..Why don't the liberals just say who they really
    are..you know they can't..If you speak to an Honest democrat of which there are very few, he will tell you the truth about his party and their dishonest agenda
  • Latti I... Hotcho 2013/10/28 20:52:35
  • spiritg... Hotcho 2013/10/28 21:18:02
    spiritgal33
    +1
    You are so full of hypacritical bs its not funny...you people talk about your own party then blame it on us....don't spead your bs to me..i will never listen to your blasphemy..EVER!
  • jubil8 ... Hotcho 2014/07/28 15:39:01
    jubil8 BN-0 PON
    +3
    Democrats don't need a history lesson anymore than most Americans do.

    But it's fun watching the few Cons who comment here try to shift the ground and make this about something else.
  • monkeyking908 2013/10/28 03:46:45
    I agree; here is my opinion on the matter
    monkeyking908
    for the most part i do agree the parts i dont are

    "indentured servants only worked for a certain amount of years and were free, to be on their own, when their contract was up" this was rarely the case a lot of the times the owners would refuse to let them go or keep adding money to what they owe

    "over 99.9% did so, because it guaranteed their enslaved relatives safety" there is no way to prove this ether way and it just puts a happy spin on the fact they had slaves as well

    i will take constructive criticism on these points but please no trolling i dont take kindly to trolls
  • Latti I... monkeyk... 2013/10/28 04:20:07
    Latti Ice Ganga Gangsta of PHAET
    +1
    Yes; indenture servants.

    I forget the owners name, but three of his servants ran away from him. Two were White and one was Black. When all three was brought before trial; the two White servants had four years added to them, while the Black servant was given life. That is how slavery came about pertaining to the illusion of race, and that was the first markings of it in the U.S.
  • monkeyk... Latti I... 2013/10/28 04:31:26
    monkeyking908
    no im sure there where many before but from what i hear the first legal slave owner was a black person and they even made it a law that black people can own black slaves and that is what started the movement towards slavery in the states

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/09/19 09:52:24

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals