quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:

quote:

The two things are different.

So
When the transferee has absolutely no say in the matter-
being "sold" (indentured) by your family or feudal lord or overlord
rather than being captured by another "tribe" or entity?

The result IS somehow remarkably different to you?

Truly a convoluted situational "ethics" manner of "thinking"--
then again, we should expect such from a barrister.

quote:

Comparing your family history to slavery is nonsensical.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:

quote:

The two things are different.

So
When the transferee has absolutely no say in the matter-
being "sold" (indentured) by your family or feudal lord or overlord
rather than being captured by another "tribe" or entity?

The result IS somehow remarkably different to you?

Truly a convoluted situational "ethics" manner of "thinking"--
then again, we should expect such from a barrister.

I swear, your posts are like haiku gibberish.

"Indentured servants were men and women who signed a contract (also known as an indenture or a covenant) by which they agreed to work for a certain number of years in exchange for transportation to Virginia and, once they arrived, food, clothing, and shelter."

Remind me again about the contract or agreement that the slaves signed? Or, how they agreed to be slaves in return for transportation to colonial America? And the agreement about how long they'd have to be slaves? And, whether or not the slaves" children belonged to the slave owner? And whether or not the wives of the indentured servants were subject to being raped by the folks the indentured servant was working for? And, most importantly, at what point would the slaves be freed?

Need more info about the difference between the two things? Think harder about it and maybe you can figure it out on your own. Seems doubtful in light of your post but try.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
For the record…my ancestors who brought the Easter name to the USA…came the same way — as indentured servants…forced to ride and work in the hull of a ship…whipped regularly.

They (4 brothers) escaped once in the USA and hid in the West.

Fur the record, indentured servants were not by law Chattel.

Indentured Servants were not bred and their children sold on farms once the Cross Atlantic Slave Trade.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
How come no one is talking about the ethnic cleansing of the Indians??

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
You are lost.

The people w common sense understand that indentured servitude is not the same footing as being a Chattel Slave.

You know who else was beaten labor before Progressives, whose champion was President Theodore Roosevelt, started to put an end to it through government.

You did not refute my basic example as to why the institution la are not the same. This is because you can’t do it.

Also, you know how indentured servitude was different than chattel slavery? One ended. The other you weee born in it and died in it. One being freed at the Grace of from Chattel Slavery did not allow one citizenship.

Hi, and let us not forget we ended Indentured Servitude wo a region fighting to preserve it.

Indentured Servitude was not dependent upon race or culture. There were Scottish, Irish, and English indentured.

Indentured Serenity were permitted to obtain property independently which was the qualification to exercise voting rights upon end of the term. Chattel sleeves could not.

I will not allow you to come here and lie.

Your cause was lost in 1864; really 1862. I am glad it was.

Go support another insurrection.

Gay people are not abominations. You are.

Your secondary cause to permit the mistreatment and differential treatment of those different than you, and limit their political influence is on going.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
How come no one is talking about the ethnic cleansing of the Indians??

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:

quote:

The two things are different.

So
When the transferee has absolutely no say in the matter-
being "sold" (indentured) by your family or feudal lord or overlord
rather than being captured by another "tribe" or entity?

The result IS somehow remarkably different to you?

Truly a convoluted situational "ethics" manner of "thinking"--
then again, we should expect such from a barrister.

I swear, your posts are like haiku gibberish.

"Indentured servants were men and women who signed a contract (also known as an indenture or a covenant) by which they agreed to work for a certain number of years in exchange for transportation to Virginia and, once they arrived, food, clothing, and shelter."

Remind me again about the contract or agreement that the slaves signed? Or, how they agreed to be slaves in return for transportation to colonial America? And the agreement about how long they'd have to be slaves? And, whether or not the slaves" children belonged to the slave owner? And whether or not the wives of the indentured servants were subject to being raped by the folks the indentured servant was working for? And, most importantly, at what point would the slaves be freed?

Need more info about the difference between the two things? Think harder about it and maybe you can figure it out on your own. Seems doubtful in light of your post but try.

Yet, many Irish and Scots-Irish arrived in the New World with no signed contract. They were bought and sold as property. The numbers of servants not under contract but indentured for indefinite periods is not well documented (the lack of contracts might account for this!) The English cried out against enslaving Africans but had no qualms when it came to enslaving Irish and Scots-Irish.
Of course, residents of the Emerald Isle had a long history of enslavement by others, and many were forcibly removed and spent their lives in foreign lands. Maybe we need some reparations. I could use a new boat! Regards, Bill

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Wow! All I have got to say is that some people are actually nuttier than I ever deemed possible.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Wow! All I have got to say is that some people are actually nuttier than I ever deemed possible.

Wow! All I have to say is that you're on record as saying you're going to vote for trump.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
There's no real comparison between indentured servitude and chattel slavery, but neither one is something any of us would endure. Both have been outlawed for a reason.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:


Instead of being grateful that she lives in America, she is demanding to be paid to live there!

This is a question that I have tried to look at from different perspectives: is American citizenship reparations enough?

The transatlantic slave trade was horrific. I wonder how many African Americans would erase the transatlantic slave trade from history, knowing that doing so would mean that their family line never left Africa?

Who is in a more enviable position: the American whose ancestors who were brought here as slaves, or the African whose ancestors were not trafficked to the Americans?

Do you have any idea how offensive this argument is to African-Americans? You're telling them that they should be grateful that their ancestors were enslaved. Ripped away from their loved ones, put in the holds of stinking ships for weeks on end. Sold like chattel at market upon arrival. Forced to work like dogs for no wages. Raped by their owners.

It's not a position that ought to be advocated.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
That said, taking the position that reparations shouldn't be paid because African-Americans should be grateful that they were enslaved because they now get to live in America is offensive. The fact that some atrocity eventually resulted in some positive event, condition or occurrence doesn't excuse or validate the atrocity.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Leeper:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:

quote:

The two things are different.

So
When the transferee has absolutely no say in the matter-
being "sold" (indentured) by your family or feudal lord or overlord
rather than being captured by another "tribe" or entity?

The result IS somehow remarkably different to you?

Truly a convoluted situational "ethics" manner of "thinking"--
then again, we should expect such from a barrister.

I swear, your posts are like haiku gibberish.

"Indentured servants were men and women who signed a contract (also known as an indenture or a covenant) by which they agreed to work for a certain number of years in exchange for transportation to Virginia and, once they arrived, food, clothing, and shelter."

Remind me again about the contract or agreement that the slaves signed? Or, how they agreed to be slaves in return for transportation to colonial America? And the agreement about how long they'd have to be slaves? And, whether or not the slaves" children belonged to the slave owner? And whether or not the wives of the indentured servants were subject to being raped by the folks the indentured servant was working for? And, most importantly, at what point would the slaves be freed?

Need more info about the difference between the two things? Think harder about it and maybe you can figure it out on your own. Seems doubtful in light of your post but try.

Yet, many Irish and Scots-Irish arrived in the New World with no signed contract. They were bought and sold as property. The numbers of servants not under contract but indentured for indefinite periods is not well documented (the lack of contracts might account for this!) The English cried out against enslaving Africans but had no qualms when it came to enslaving Irish and Scots-Irish.
Of course, residents of the Emerald Isle had a long history of enslavement by others, and many were forcibly removed and spent their lives in foreign lands. Maybe we need some reparations. I could use a new boat! Regards, Bill

If the Scots-Irish are getting reparations money, I want to know where to file my claim.

Again, there's no comparison between indentured servitude and the enslavement of African-Americans. That's not any sort of an endorsement of the treatment that our potato-eating ancestors endured, it was shit. But, it's not analagous to enslavement as practiced in colonial America.

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
There's no real comparison between indentured servitude and chattel slavery, but neither one is something any of us would endure. Both have been outlawed for a reason.

You say that there is no comparison, and then in the same sentence you provide two comparisons??? This swamp sure seems to rob some of their logic…

Lane’s point is that, in the grand scheme of things, humans of all stripes have gone through horrible conditions throughout history. Was slavery worse than servitude? Was the Nazi genocide worse than the Rwandan genocide? Stalin’s genocide? Khan’s? The Vikings’? The Cossacks?

Generational trauma is real, but what are the limits?

Do we see any other group going around playing the victim over something that has been gone for 150 years?



African Americans, along with Native Americans, have a solid claim to the fact that they have not been given equal access to the American dream. I would hold up schools as our most glaring example. I would be happy to see this fixed so that future generations can be brought into the fold instead of continuing to live on the margins.

But cash for victims of slavery??

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

That said, taking the position that reparations shouldn't be paid because African-Americans should be grateful that they were enslaved because they now get to live in America is offensive. The fact that some atrocity eventually resulted in some positive event, condition or occurrence doesn't excuse or validate the atrocity.

quote:

Originally posted by JBrown:
The concern Scott, is that SJWs like Mike Mitchel and Roland think that they can eliminate topics from conversation by simply by proclaiming them to be offensive or racist, and therefore out of bounds. They think that the only narrative that is allowed is black=victim.

I am not trying to dictate what anyone feels. My point was that some AA people would agree with the statement/question, others would disagree. Mohammad Ali agreed.

Both Mike and Roland refused to even admit that a black person might agree. They believed the question was too offensive to even be considered. Mike said that it was “not a position to be advocated”. Who the hell is he to decide that?

So why the overriding concern? Well Renee is talking about heading off to Yale in 4 years. By all indications she will have the grades and such.

And here’s the thing: the country is going sideways. Extremists on both sides are fanning the flames and tensions are rising. When one side controls the narrative, while fanning the flames, it seems clear that tensions will continue to rise. How long until things boil over? None of us really wants to consider the ramifications of a second Trump term.

MLK’s dream seems to have died. Lines of division have been drawn. The SJW’s are continuing to tell young people of color that they are disenfranchised, that nothing good has come into their lives due to being American, that America hates them, that they have no chance.

So, as France(seriously, France?!) smolders, I am left to ponder how this will affect Renee. Will white nationalists and Antifa be carrying out mass shootings against each other? As Roland pointed out, Renee isn’t actually black or white since I raised her “white”, so will she be a target for both sides?

Meanwhile, Mike and Roland run the victim narrative. They play dumb(?) and ignore the possibility that maybe, just maybe, being black on America is better than being black just about anywhere else. And that is what these kids are being told: the system hates you, it was designed to oppress you, you have been wronged, anyone who doesn’t agree with you is a racist, you are owed reparations, etc. What happens when CA hands out reparations and other states are too slow to follow?

I’m worried. This isn’t building towards a peaceful end.

100% founded! I have never seen the country so racially divided. I started elementary school in Texas in 1970. The school I attended was 30% black, 30% hispanic, and 40% white…a cotton farming community outside Lubbock, TX. No problems at all.

Today…there is racial division which teters on the brink of violence everywhere…so sad.

And racist fools scream “I’m offended!” anytime their “woe is me” narrative is questioned, thereby bringing more young people into the disaffect fold.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
A wrong like slavery has effects that echo down through the generations, the same as physical, sexual, and emotional abuse tends to run in families. Older black people still remember blatant discrimination. Not everyone can rise above such treatment in a few generations.

Slavers used to split up black families for more efficient breeding. Thereby depriving boys of father role models.

What kind of work ethic would you expect a slave to develop?

What kind of respect for property rights?

Telling the descendants of slaves to move on is very easy for a white man to say. Especially when his own ancestors may have been slavers and he wants to make excuses for them.

quote:

“The worst enemy that the Negro have is this white man that runs around here drooling at the mouth professing to love Negros and calling himself a liberal, and it is following these white liberals that has perpetuated problems that Negros have.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Only racists run around calling people racists.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
How come no one is talking about the ethnic cleansing of the Indians??

quote:

African Americans, along with Native Americans, have a solid claim to the fact that they have not been given equal access to the American dream. I would hold up schools as our most glaring example. I would be happy to see this fixed so that future generations can be brought into the fold instead of continuing to live on the margins.

quote:

Originally posted by buckeyeshooter:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
How come no one is talking about the ethnic cleansing of the Indians??

If any group was taken advantage of,lied to and cheated it was them. Sadly, if you visit a reservation, the standard of living generally is pretty low, lots of unemployment and crime, drugs and alcoholism all around. One positive thing some areas have done is the gambling casinos. This brings money into the community and the Indians get to make money and devistate the white man with gambling addiction and the problems it causes.

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:

quote:

African Americans, along with Native Americans, have a solid claim to the fact that they have not been given equal access to the American dream. I would hold up schools as our most glaring example. I would be happy to see this fixed so that future generations can be brought into the fold instead of continuing to live on the margins.

Is there something wrong with the schools or the reluctance, by students of color in particular, to adapt to the requirements that are part and parcel of the learning process?

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:

quote:

African Americans, along with Native Americans, have a solid claim to the fact that they have not been given equal access to the American dream. I would hold up schools as our most glaring example. I would be happy to see this fixed so that future generations can be brought into the fold instead of continuing to live on the margins.

Is there something wrong with the schools or the reluctance, by students of color in particular, to adapt to the requirements that are part and parcel of the learning process?

There's nothing that stops any American from getting a reasonable education, securing reasonable employment and having a pleasant life. Were I to advise an Indian I'd tell them to move as far off the reservation as possible. Most of the 50 states have decent opportunities to be had. California and Hawaii are to expensive, but even here in Dillingham there's careers in administration, education, law enforcement, medicine, and all trades. A breathing, standing person need only show up, actually be present to be hired.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
There's nothing that stops any American from getting a reasonable education, securing reasonable employment and having a pleasant life. Were I to advise an Indian I'd tell them to move as far off the reservation as possible. Most of the 50 states have decent opportunities to be had. California and Hawaii are to expensive, but even here in Dillingham there's careers in administration, education, law enforcement, medicine, and all trades. A breathing, standing person need only show up, actually be present to be hired.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
For many of us, many of us here "home is where the heart is" so we stay nearby family, familiarity, mom and pop.
Yeah, those emotional attachments can turn us upsidedown in a moment.

I'm afraid, "just move!" ain't that easy.

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:

quote:

African Americans, along with Native Americans, have a solid claim to the fact that they have not been given equal access to the American dream. I would hold up schools as our most glaring example. I would be happy to see this fixed so that future generations can be brought into the fold instead of continuing to live on the margins.

Is there something wrong with the schools or the reluctance, by students of color in particular, to adapt to the requirements that are part and parcel of the learning process?

quote:

Our current system for funding public schools shortchanges students, particularly low-income students. Education funding generally is inadequate and inequitable; It relies too heavily on state and local resources (particularly property tax revenues); the federal government plays a small and an insufficient role; funding levels vary widely across states; and high-poverty districts get less funding per student than low-poverty districts.

Source: https://www.epi.org/publicatio...dent%20than%20low%2D

quote:

The underfunded schools tend have both more students per class and a higher percentage of unruly and unmotivated students, along with, and often exacerbated by inexperienced and generally poor teachers (who else would want to teach in those schools, especially when you factor in that they pay less and tend to be in rough areas.

quote:

Originally posted by fulvio:

quote:

The underfunded schools tend have both more students per class and a higher percentage of unruly and unmotivated students, along with, and often exacerbated by inexperienced and generally poor teachers (who else would want to teach in those schools, especially when you factor in that they pay less and tend to be in rough areas.

That is the answer wherein lies the problem and it comes from someone with hands on the subject and because that particular class of the community are multiplying like rats, the problem is exacerbated giving no glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel.