First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Was Slavery all that bad?
13258 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / O.C. So.Cal
Offline
Posted 11/24/08 , edited 12/20/08
I was studying slavery in history right now and i've noticed that slavery wasn't all that bad. I mean of course its bad but its not as bad as people thought. MOST masters treated their slaves pretty well (they didn't let them do dangerous work because slaves are property and don't want to lose value in their property) and a lot of them were eventually freed by saving up their own money. Some white people in the free states were actually worse because as the industrial revolution came to be, there were thousands of workers working for 14 hours a day with only a 30 minute lunch break and only sunday off. There were no safety requirements so people were gettting their hands chopped off and were forced to live in crowded small rooms with 20 other strangers they haven't met before. A lot of people got sick because of the sanitary conditions and once you were sick/had your hand chopped off, you were no longer needed and therefore were kicked out onto the streets crippled and without a home. At least if you were a slave, you were fed, got to work in the open air, and were taken care of until you got old. Its only because of books like uncle tom's cabin and such that made slavery seem like torture


EDIT: ok ive been getting a lot of quotings from retards who don't provide evidence they just say OMG SLAVERY IS SO BAD HOW WOULD YOU FEEL LIKE IT IF YOU WERE A SLAVE HUH obviously slavery is bad IN THESE TIMES but what i'm saying is how slavery was right before the civil war. Many free whites weren't better off in the north AND the south and 75% of the south were poor white trash who even knew themselves that they were as bad as slaves.

EDIT2: for those of you saying slavery is worse because they have no rights and freedom, well blacks didn't have any rights if they were free anyway, and for most of the other free people, those wokring in factories, they were called "wage slaves' beecause they HAD rights but didn't have a chance to USE them. Whats the point of having something when you can't even use them? its like giving an xbox360 to a child in Africa and saying here scince you have such a bad life, im going to give you this xbox.

EDIT 3: ok so when did douchebags start coming into the extended discussion? some people should be banned from posting in the exended discussion or something...just stick to the general forum you ignorant piece of shits cuz i am NOT going to explain to you what i've been repeating to 10 other different people when all my views are on the first post

EDIT 4: Historians have been researching slavery and they learned that it is impossible to generalize slavery, the treatment of slaves vary greatly among different owners
5561 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Neverland
Offline
Posted 11/24/08 , edited 11/24/08
wait.. what history book are u reading? Do you have any idea what they actually had 2 do? They got up as soon as the sun was up and didn't go back inside till they couldn't see(depended on the season). They had to work through the smothering heat all day long in the fields with the watchers constantly watching them so they didn't take a break. The women were raped by the watchers continuously, I live in the south of the US and we were fully educated on what whites did to blacks back in the day and I'm fully ashamed of it.
eh, i just realized i've been talking about the slavery in the USA, i actually dont know much about slavery in other countries so..<.<
13258 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / O.C. So.Cal
Offline
Posted 11/25/08

lonely_devil wrote:

wait.. what history book are u reading? Do you have any idea what they actually had 2 do? They got up as soon as the sun was up and didn't go back inside till they couldn't see(depended on the season). They had to work through the smothering heat all day long in the fields with the watchers constantly watching them so they didn't take a break. The women were raped by the watchers continuously, I live in the south of the US and we were fully educated on what whites did to blacks back in the day and I'm fully ashamed of it.
eh, i just realized i've been talking about the slavery in the USA, i actually dont know much about slavery in other countries so..<.<


american pageant 13th edition for ap us. history. i know it sucks for the women being raped (but women were being raped by white men all the time anyway) but the working conditions for the slaves were still a lot better than the working conditions in factories.
1493 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Australia
Offline
Posted 11/25/08

LemonyPanda wrote:

I was studying slavery in history right now and i've noticed that slavery wasn't all that bad. I mean of course its bad but its not as bad as people thought. MOST masters treated their slaves pretty well (they didn't let them do dangerous work because slaves are property and don't want to lose value in their property) and a lot of them were eventually freed by saving up their own money. Some white people in the free states were actually worse because as the industrial revolution came to be, there were thousands of workers working for 14 hours a day with only a 30 minute lunch break and only sunday off. There were no safety requirements so people were gettting their hands chopped off and were forced to live in crowded small rooms with 20 other strangers they haven't met before. A lot of people got sick because of the sanitary conditions and once you were sick/had your hand chopped off, you were no longer needed and therefore were kicked out onto the streets crippled and without a home. At least if you were a slave, you were fed, got to work in the open air, and were taken care of until you got old. Its only because of books like uncle tom's cabin and such that made slavery seem like torture


*Sigh* I hate to say this but I pity humanity for having the ability to give some fools this idea. Okay first off, Slaves tend to work really hard, they had no freedom to decide what they will eat or whether they will even live to the next morning. Also, they did not have the right to have children, get married and what not and most slaves tend to be children, orphans, prisoners of war and those in debt that can't pay them back. They were denied basically everything and were treated as animals.

Next point, you say that they will be treated nicely, well fed and what not, did not worry about starving to death, this would only occur to the slaves that were important for example Greeks who were enslaved by the Romans. Greeks tend to be intelligent so they would be tutors, teachers, historians, whatever intellectual job you like to say while those that tend to be stupid like the "barbarians" ( I hate saying that word but I have to get the message across) would be literally worked to death. So take this into account, don't you think that intellectuals would be successful and rich if they were not enslaved like Greeks of that time and wouldn't it be better to give the poor "barbarians" to have a choice in where they work, how they lived et cetera.
13258 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / O.C. So.Cal
Offline
Posted 11/25/08

mikejacobs wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:

I was studying slavery in history right now and i've noticed that slavery wasn't all that bad. I mean of course its bad but its not as bad as people thought. MOST masters treated their slaves pretty well (they didn't let them do dangerous work because slaves are property and don't want to lose value in their property) and a lot of them were eventually freed by saving up their own money. Some white people in the free states were actually worse because as the industrial revolution came to be, there were thousands of workers working for 14 hours a day with only a 30 minute lunch break and only sunday off. There were no safety requirements so people were gettting their hands chopped off and were forced to live in crowded small rooms with 20 other strangers they haven't met before. A lot of people got sick because of the sanitary conditions and once you were sick/had your hand chopped off, you were no longer needed and therefore were kicked out onto the streets crippled and without a home. At least if you were a slave, you were fed, got to work in the open air, and were taken care of until you got old. Its only because of books like uncle tom's cabin and such that made slavery seem like torture


*Sigh* I hate to say this but I pity humanity for having the ability to give some fools this idea. Okay first off, Slaves tend to work really hard, they had no freedom to decide what they will eat or whether they will even live to the next morning. Also, they did not have the right to have children, get married and what not and most slaves tend to be children, orphans, prisoners of war and those in debt that can't pay them back. They were denied basically everything and were treated as animals.

Next point, you say that they will be treated nicely, well fed and what not, did not worry about starving to death, this would only occur to the slaves that were important for example Greeks who were enslaved by the Romans. Greeks tend to be intelligent so they would be tutors, teachers, historians, whatever intellectual job you like to say while those that tend to be stupid like the "barbarians" ( I hate saying that word but I have to get the message across) would be literally worked to death. So take this into account, don't you think that intellectuals would be successful and rich if they were not enslaved like Greeks of that time and wouldn't it be better to give the poor "barbarians" to have a choice in where they work, how they lived et cetera.


altho they have no free will and lose rights, (its not like free black people would have rights at that time anyway) at least they can SURVIVE and live in HEALTHY CONDITIONS

and slaves WERE important to people. Slaves were expensive, and only a few people could afford em. half of the people who owned slaves only owned 1-5 slaves because they were so expensive. as i stated before only 4% of the white population could afford 50slaves or more. in fact, they were so careful of their slaves, they never made the slaves do dangerous jobs such as fixing the roof because they might accidently fall and break their necks. For those kidns of jobs they just hired a bunch of irish paid workers to do it (there were a lot of irish wanting jobs because of the massive immigration) because they don't lose "property" if the irish break their necks. Why don't you learn UNBIASED history first and THEN come debate
1493 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Australia
Offline
Posted 11/25/08

LemonyPanda wrote:


mikejacobs wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:

I was studying slavery in history right now and i've noticed that slavery wasn't all that bad. I mean of course its bad but its not as bad as people thought. MOST masters treated their slaves pretty well (they didn't let them do dangerous work because slaves are property and don't want to lose value in their property) and a lot of them were eventually freed by saving up their own money. Some white people in the free states were actually worse because as the industrial revolution came to be, there were thousands of workers working for 14 hours a day with only a 30 minute lunch break and only sunday off. There were no safety requirements so people were gettting their hands chopped off and were forced to live in crowded small rooms with 20 other strangers they haven't met before. A lot of people got sick because of the sanitary conditions and once you were sick/had your hand chopped off, you were no longer needed and therefore were kicked out onto the streets crippled and without a home. At least if you were a slave, you were fed, got to work in the open air, and were taken care of until you got old. Its only because of books like uncle tom's cabin and such that made slavery seem like torture


*Sigh* I hate to say this but I pity humanity for having the ability to give some fools this idea. Okay first off, Slaves tend to work really hard, they had no freedom to decide what they will eat or whether they will even live to the next morning. Also, they did not have the right to have children, get married and what not and most slaves tend to be children, orphans, prisoners of war and those in debt that can't pay them back. They were denied basically everything and were treated as animals.

Next point, you say that they will be treated nicely, well fed and what not, did not worry about starving to death, this would only occur to the slaves that were important for example Greeks who were enslaved by the Romans. Greeks tend to be intelligent so they would be tutors, teachers, historians, whatever intellectual job you like to say while those that tend to be stupid like the "barbarians" ( I hate saying that word but I have to get the message across) would be literally worked to death. So take this into account, don't you think that intellectuals would be successful and rich if they were not enslaved like Greeks of that time and wouldn't it be better to give the poor "barbarians" to have a choice in where they work, how they lived et cetera.


altho they have no free will and lose rights, (its not like free black people would have rights at that time anyway) at least they can SURVIVE and live in HEALTHY CONDITIONS

and slaves WERE important to people. Slaves were expensive, and only a few people could afford em. half of the people who owned slaves only owned 1-5 slaves because they were so expensive. as i stated before only 4% of the white population could afford 50slaves or more. in fact, they were so careful of their slaves, they never made the slaves do dangerous jobs such as fixing the roof because they might accidently fall and break their necks. For those kidns of jobs they just hired a bunch of irish paid workers to do it (there were a lot of irish wanting jobs because of the massive immigration) because they don't lose "property" if the irish break their necks. Why don't you learn UNBIASED history first and THEN come debate


"Half of the people who owned slaves only owned 1-5 slaves because they were so expensive", by the gods man, 1 slave is enough, damn, you really look down on humanity itself don't you, thinking that the poor people should become slaves to the wealthy men. I have to say, using your logic, are you saying that blacks should have just stayed as slaves forever and not ask for freedom? I guess Martin Luther King (even though Martin Luther King had nothing to do with slavery, but he did improve the Blacks lives) is a very bad man in your eyes after all, he's very progressive, such man should not live! (Please note the sarcasm). By the way, 4% of the white population affording 50 slaves or more is actually a large amount, you could start a business using those slaves, and amassing money to the point that you don't even care about one or two slaves. So, what do you think they had slaves for, for the purpose of beautifying their homes? I think they used the slaves to do jobs that were dangerous, and don't forget, the mines were filled with slaves.
976 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / everywhere thats...
Offline
Posted 11/25/08

LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:

i hope your not serious??


y wouldn't I be?


that is like saying if i owned you and forced you into prostitution it would be okay as long as i gave you good clothes and a place to sleep.... being property is nothing compared to having free will..


why bring prostitution into this? and i would rather lose my free will and live happily (and maybe save up some money to buy my own freedom) than be "free" but not be able to do anything in life except for risk my life daily for a small paycheck that can barely get food for my already starving family.


i brought it up to make a point that not all slaves worked in the fields... also i dont know where you got the buy your freedom bit... you should look up how many slaves actually got to "buy there way out of freedom" before you state something so stupid.... also atleast those starving families got to be together rather then taken and split up... lastly you saying you would rather live in a "nice slave camp" instead of working in a factory is you expressing your free will.. slaves did not have the choice to work in the "nice slave camp" or not alot of them and or their families ended up in ones like uncle tom's cabin...


There were a lot of free blacks in the South contrary to popular belief before the civil war. ( i think 1/4 or 1/2 i tried to find my sheet of statistics but i left it in my locker) the south wasn't all plantation farms, only 4% of the white male population in the south were considered plantation farms, and 1/4 of the white male population owned slaves. 75% were dirt poor whites who had no slaves at all. and the south also passed a law that you can't sell children away from their mothers until they were 12 or something like that. idk about you but i'd rather have my son be sent and have a chance of freedom someday then have my children dying in my arms just because i didn't have enough money to afford the medicine they desperately need. btw the story of uncle tom's cabin is the one that started this stereoytype, very few masters treaetd their slaves like that and couldn't afford to beat their slaves because that would be 'devaluing property"


once again i didnt ask how many were free but i said find out how many were able to buy their way out of freedom.... also just because a small amount were free does not justify the ones that werent.. im fully aware that not everybody were slave owners.. and if slavery was so good then why dont you go and find out how many of these poor factory families sold their children to slavery as well... i bet you wont find any because they were smart enough to know it was not a better life..


i dont know the statistics for that but i know there were more people who bought their way or were freed by their masters than slaves who ran away. and btw im sure the families would have sold their children but it was illegal for a white to own another white


haha you really need to have a better argument before making false statements like these ones... just as you stated you are studying this subject its obvious you need to do some more research.. im done with this debate until you find some credible sources to back your so called evidence that slavery was not such a bad thing.. this will be never, and thus it means the end of this debate... once again i really hope your not serious about this and that your just really bored as i am...
13258 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / O.C. So.Cal
Offline
Posted 11/25/08

mikejacobs wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


mikejacobs wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:

I was studying slavery in history right now and i've noticed that slavery wasn't all that bad. I mean of course its bad but its not as bad as people thought. MOST masters treated their slaves pretty well (they didn't let them do dangerous work because slaves are property and don't want to lose value in their property) and a lot of them were eventually freed by saving up their own money. Some white people in the free states were actually worse because as the industrial revolution came to be, there were thousands of workers working for 14 hours a day with only a 30 minute lunch break and only sunday off. There were no safety requirements so people were gettting their hands chopped off and were forced to live in crowded small rooms with 20 other strangers they haven't met before. A lot of people got sick because of the sanitary conditions and once you were sick/had your hand chopped off, you were no longer needed and therefore were kicked out onto the streets crippled and without a home. At least if you were a slave, you were fed, got to work in the open air, and were taken care of until you got old. Its only because of books like uncle tom's cabin and such that made slavery seem like torture


*Sigh* I hate to say this but I pity humanity for having the ability to give some fools this idea. Okay first off, Slaves tend to work really hard, they had no freedom to decide what they will eat or whether they will even live to the next morning. Also, they did not have the right to have children, get married and what not and most slaves tend to be children, orphans, prisoners of war and those in debt that can't pay them back. They were denied basically everything and were treated as animals.

Next point, you say that they will be treated nicely, well fed and what not, did not worry about starving to death, this would only occur to the slaves that were important for example Greeks who were enslaved by the Romans. Greeks tend to be intelligent so they would be tutors, teachers, historians, whatever intellectual job you like to say while those that tend to be stupid like the "barbarians" ( I hate saying that word but I have to get the message across) would be literally worked to death. So take this into account, don't you think that intellectuals would be successful and rich if they were not enslaved like Greeks of that time and wouldn't it be better to give the poor "barbarians" to have a choice in where they work, how they lived et cetera.


altho they have no free will and lose rights, (its not like free black people would have rights at that time anyway) at least they can SURVIVE and live in HEALTHY CONDITIONS

and slaves WERE important to people. Slaves were expensive, and only a few people could afford em. half of the people who owned slaves only owned 1-5 slaves because they were so expensive. as i stated before only 4% of the white population could afford 50slaves or more. in fact, they were so careful of their slaves, they never made the slaves do dangerous jobs such as fixing the roof because they might accidently fall and break their necks. For those kidns of jobs they just hired a bunch of irish paid workers to do it (there were a lot of irish wanting jobs because of the massive immigration) because they don't lose "property" if the irish break their necks. Why don't you learn UNBIASED history first and THEN come debate


"Half of the people who owned slaves only owned 1-5 slaves because they were so expensive", by the gods man, 1 slave is enough, damn, you really look down on humanity itself don't you, thinking that the poor people should become slaves to the wealthy men. I have to say, using your logic, are you saying that blacks should have just stayed as slaves forever and not ask for freedom? I guess Martin Luther King (even though Martin Luther King had nothing to do with slavery, but he did improve the Blacks lives) is a very bad man in your eyes after all, he's very progressive, such man should not live! (Please note the sarcasm). By the way, 4% of the white population affording 50 slaves or more is actually a large amount, you could start a business using those slaves, and amassing money to the point that you don't even care about one or two slaves. So, what do you think they had slaves for, for the purpose of beautifying their homes? I think they used the slaves to do jobs that were dangerous, and don't forget, the mines were filled with slaves.


why don't you read my post first...i said that slavery is still bad but its not as bad as the stereotype that comes with it. and i get my facts off my history book and my teacher not half-assed assumptions ilke the ones you just made. now if your going to quote me on this don't bother waiting for a reply cuz im going to sleep now
13258 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / O.C. So.Cal
Offline
Posted 11/25/08

Zabooma_Blaster wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:

i hope your not serious??


y wouldn't I be?


that is like saying if i owned you and forced you into prostitution it would be okay as long as i gave you good clothes and a place to sleep.... being property is nothing compared to having free will..


why bring prostitution into this? and i would rather lose my free will and live happily (and maybe save up some money to buy my own freedom) than be "free" but not be able to do anything in life except for risk my life daily for a small paycheck that can barely get food for my already starving family.


i brought it up to make a point that not all slaves worked in the fields... also i dont know where you got the buy your freedom bit... you should look up how many slaves actually got to "buy there way out of freedom" before you state something so stupid.... also atleast those starving families got to be together rather then taken and split up... lastly you saying you would rather live in a "nice slave camp" instead of working in a factory is you expressing your free will.. slaves did not have the choice to work in the "nice slave camp" or not alot of them and or their families ended up in ones like uncle tom's cabin...


There were a lot of free blacks in the South contrary to popular belief before the civil war. ( i think 1/4 or 1/2 i tried to find my sheet of statistics but i left it in my locker) the south wasn't all plantation farms, only 4% of the white male population in the south were considered plantation farms, and 1/4 of the white male population owned slaves. 75% were dirt poor whites who had no slaves at all. and the south also passed a law that you can't sell children away from their mothers until they were 12 or something like that. idk about you but i'd rather have my son be sent and have a chance of freedom someday then have my children dying in my arms just because i didn't have enough money to afford the medicine they desperately need. btw the story of uncle tom's cabin is the one that started this stereoytype, very few masters treaetd their slaves like that and couldn't afford to beat their slaves because that would be 'devaluing property"


once again i didnt ask how many were free but i said find out how many were able to buy their way out of freedom.... also just because a small amount were free does not justify the ones that werent.. im fully aware that not everybody were slave owners.. and if slavery was so good then why dont you go and find out how many of these poor factory families sold their children to slavery as well... i bet you wont find any because they were smart enough to know it was not a better life..


i dont know the statistics for that but i know there were more people who bought their way or were freed by their masters than slaves who ran away. and btw im sure the families would have sold their children but it was illegal for a white to own another white


haha you really need to have a better argument before making false statements like these ones... just as you stated you are studying this subject its obvious you need to do some more research.. im done with this debate until you find some credible sources to back your so called evidence that slavery was not such a bad thing.. this will be never, and thus it means the end of this debate... once again i really hope your not serious about this and that your just really bored as i am...


what you expect me to fax my sheet of statistics to you? why don't you google it yourself
976 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / everywhere thats...
Offline
Posted 11/25/08

LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


Zabooma_Blaster wrote:

i hope your not serious??


y wouldn't I be?


that is like saying if i owned you and forced you into prostitution it would be okay as long as i gave you good clothes and a place to sleep.... being property is nothing compared to having free will..


why bring prostitution into this? and i would rather lose my free will and live happily (and maybe save up some money to buy my own freedom) than be "free" but not be able to do anything in life except for risk my life daily for a small paycheck that can barely get food for my already starving family.


i brought it up to make a point that not all slaves worked in the fields... also i dont know where you got the buy your freedom bit... you should look up how many slaves actually got to "buy there way out of freedom" before you state something so stupid.... also atleast those starving families got to be together rather then taken and split up... lastly you saying you would rather live in a "nice slave camp" instead of working in a factory is you expressing your free will.. slaves did not have the choice to work in the "nice slave camp" or not alot of them and or their families ended up in ones like uncle tom's cabin...


There were a lot of free blacks in the South contrary to popular belief before the civil war. ( i think 1/4 or 1/2 i tried to find my sheet of statistics but i left it in my locker) the south wasn't all plantation farms, only 4% of the white male population in the south were considered plantation farms, and 1/4 of the white male population owned slaves. 75% were dirt poor whites who had no slaves at all. and the south also passed a law that you can't sell children away from their mothers until they were 12 or something like that. idk about you but i'd rather have my son be sent and have a chance of freedom someday then have my children dying in my arms just because i didn't have enough money to afford the medicine they desperately need. btw the story of uncle tom's cabin is the one that started this stereoytype, very few masters treaetd their slaves like that and couldn't afford to beat their slaves because that would be 'devaluing property"


once again i didnt ask how many were free but i said find out how many were able to buy their way out of freedom.... also just because a small amount were free does not justify the ones that werent.. im fully aware that not everybody were slave owners.. and if slavery was so good then why dont you go and find out how many of these poor factory families sold their children to slavery as well... i bet you wont find any because they were smart enough to know it was not a better life..


i dont know the statistics for that but i know there were more people who bought their way or were freed by their masters than slaves who ran away. and btw im sure the families would have sold their children but it was illegal for a white to own another white


haha you really need to have a better argument before making false statements like these ones... just as you stated you are studying this subject its obvious you need to do some more research.. im done with this debate until you find some credible sources to back your so called evidence that slavery was not such a bad thing.. this will be never, and thus it means the end of this debate... once again i really hope your not serious about this and that your just really bored as i am...


what you expect me to fax my sheet of statistics to you? why don't you google it yourself


i have and none of your facts hold any weight also i have been educated on this subject and furthermore i have yet to find a slave that likes being a slave... so why dont you just google it if its so easy and post it on here.. because i cannot find it
1493 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Australia
Offline
Posted 11/25/08

LemonyPanda wrote:


mikejacobs wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:


mikejacobs wrote:


LemonyPanda wrote:

I was studying slavery in history right now and i've noticed that slavery wasn't all that bad. I mean of course its bad but its not as bad as people thought. MOST masters treated their slaves pretty well (they didn't let them do dangerous work because slaves are property and don't want to lose value in their property) and a lot of them were eventually freed by saving up their own money. Some white people in the free states were actually worse because as the industrial revolution came to be, there were thousands of workers working for 14 hours a day with only a 30 minute lunch break and only sunday off. There were no safety requirements so people were gettting their hands chopped off and were forced to live in crowded small rooms with 20 other strangers they haven't met before. A lot of people got sick because of the sanitary conditions and once you were sick/had your hand chopped off, you were no longer needed and therefore were kicked out onto the streets crippled and without a home. At least if you were a slave, you were fed, got to work in the open air, and were taken care of until you got old. Its only because of books like uncle tom's cabin and such that made slavery seem like torture


*Sigh* I hate to say this but I pity humanity for having the ability to give some fools this idea. Okay first off, Slaves tend to work really hard, they had no freedom to decide what they will eat or whether they will even live to the next morning. Also, they did not have the right to have children, get married and what not and most slaves tend to be children, orphans, prisoners of war and those in debt that can't pay them back. They were denied basically everything and were treated as animals.

Next point, you say that they will be treated nicely, well fed and what not, did not worry about starving to death, this would only occur to the slaves that were important for example Greeks who were enslaved by the Romans. Greeks tend to be intelligent so they would be tutors, teachers, historians, whatever intellectual job you like to say while those that tend to be stupid like the "barbarians" ( I hate saying that word but I have to get the message across) would be literally worked to death. So take this into account, don't you think that intellectuals would be successful and rich if they were not enslaved like Greeks of that time and wouldn't it be better to give the poor "barbarians" to have a choice in where they work, how they lived et cetera.


altho they have no free will and lose rights, (its not like free black people would have rights at that time anyway) at least they can SURVIVE and live in HEALTHY CONDITIONS

and slaves WERE important to people. Slaves were expensive, and only a few people could afford em. half of the people who owned slaves only owned 1-5 slaves because they were so expensive. as i stated before only 4% of the white population could afford 50slaves or more. in fact, they were so careful of their slaves, they never made the slaves do dangerous jobs such as fixing the roof because they might accidently fall and break their necks. For those kidns of jobs they just hired a bunch of irish paid workers to do it (there were a lot of irish wanting jobs because of the massive immigration) because they don't lose "property" if the irish break their necks. Why don't you learn UNBIASED history first and THEN come debate


"Half of the people who owned slaves only owned 1-5 slaves because they were so expensive", by the gods man, 1 slave is enough, damn, you really look down on humanity itself don't you, thinking that the poor people should become slaves to the wealthy men. I have to say, using your logic, are you saying that blacks should have just stayed as slaves forever and not ask for freedom? I guess Martin Luther King (even though Martin Luther King had nothing to do with slavery, but he did improve the Blacks lives) is a very bad man in your eyes after all, he's very progressive, such man should not live! (Please note the sarcasm). By the way, 4% of the white population affording 50 slaves or more is actually a large amount, you could start a business using those slaves, and amassing money to the point that you don't even care about one or two slaves. So, what do you think they had slaves for, for the purpose of beautifying their homes? I think they used the slaves to do jobs that were dangerous, and don't forget, the mines were filled with slaves.


why don't you read my post first...i said that slavery is still bad but its not as bad as the stereotype that comes with it. and i get my facts off my history book and my teacher not half-assed assumptions ilke the ones you just made. now if your going to quote me on this don't bother waiting for a reply cuz im going to sleep now


History books can be speculative just so you know, and I don't know that much about modern forms of slavery but I know quite a lot on slaves before 90 A.D and believe me, the stereotype on slavery is rather underplayed, its more horrifying then you can imagine, but then again, you will throw a couple sentences at me that are rather offensive, say what seems like random numbers like "1-5 slaves", can't decide on the right amount eh? Seems rather half-assed assumption to me, believe me, slavery is torture, but then again, my words are wasted on a 16 year old who likes to think he knows everything, who acts like he lived at that time. But then again, I guess I am contradicting myself but I didn't live in that era either, oh on the last note, you are 16 years old who probably covered this subject lightly, come back to me and speak about it if you read about 10 authentic historical books on the subject and tell me if there are any evidence that support your hypothesis.
3090 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / The Kingdom
Offline
Posted 11/25/08
What was worse...
1) Sugar Cane Field Worker.

2) Worker During The Industrial Revolution.

3) Chinese Opium Junkie. (Dont know much about the history and a bad pic *Couldnt find one bad enough)

4) Russian Peasant.

5) McDonalds Worker.
Posted 11/25/08 , edited 11/25/08
Well, sure. Now they can bitch around how badly their ancestors were treated, but they have a TV, and live pretty decently if you'd compare their lifestyle to the current lifestyle in some places of Africa.

If their ancestors would have never been moved to the US and forced into slavery, their kids of today would most probably still live in mud huts and well...maybe they'd be happy with that kind of lifestyle, but the African Americans of today? They'd never want to give up what they have today.

Most of their ancestors got betrayed by their own "black" folks, sold to the White man for just a few glass pearls.

Yeah, racial prejudice will always remain. And the bad past will always hunt you. But...pshhh

imo, the native Americans had it a lot worse...they were mass-murdered, their food resources have been mass-killed, have no land left, their kids got taken away and were being forcefully re-educated into what we'd call a nice white man, but they are not white, not at heart at least, so this was a thing that was meant to fail from the beginning. Most of them live in alcohol and dust today. Yes...nobody ever really helped them to recover..maybe they'd have a better life now, if they would have been as bitchy as the African Americans.

But people nowadays just see those poor black people who have had a bad life, yes, I can't deny that, but we are completely forgetting about the ones who originally owned this lands called nowadays the United States of America, Canada, or South America~not going to mention all the..countries..-_-
One big civilisations of Native Americans has been rotted out. Killed. And all that's left is the dust of their once beautiful cities made of gold, and all those drunktards, and game addicted Native Americans....drinking their pain away, having lost faith in life...keeping their sadness to themselves, feeling misunderstood, etc.

4769 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
76 / M
Offline
Posted 11/25/08
of course not, those sex slave are awsome!
2066 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / New York
Offline
Posted 11/25/08

LemonyPanda wrote:

I was studying slavery in history right now and i've noticed that slavery wasn't all that bad. I mean of course its bad but its not as bad as people thought. MOST masters treated their slaves pretty well (they didn't let them do dangerous work because slaves are property and don't want to lose value in their property) and a lot of them were eventually freed by saving up their own money. Some white people in the free states were actually worse because as the industrial revolution came to be, there were thousands of workers working for 14 hours a day with only a 30 minute lunch break and only sunday off. There were no safety requirements so people were gettting their hands chopped off and were forced to live in crowded small rooms with 20 other strangers they haven't met before. A lot of people got sick because of the sanitary conditions and once you were sick/had your hand chopped off, you were no longer needed and therefore were kicked out onto the streets crippled and without a home. At least if you were a slave, you were fed, got to work in the open air, and were taken care of until you got old. Its only because of books like uncle tom's cabin and such that made slavery seem like torture


LOL

sorry,but no
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.