First British slaves in America were Irish - Page 11 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15177532
The Resister wrote:the "city on a Hill"

John Winthrop was a slaver. And besides writing a sermon wrote the first law in the US sanctioning the practice of keeping African slaves.

A man is judged by his deeds, not by his words.

— Russian proverb


:)
Last edited by ingliz on 20 Jun 2021 21:23, edited 3 times in total.
#15177533
Also, I was going to add a parallel -- that those on the right-wing often overgeneralize with their use of the term 'Muslims', when they usually mean the far-more specific context of *ISIS*, or Islamic fundamentalism.

Indicting *all Muslims* is also painting with too broad a brush.
#15177535
ingliz wrote:A man is judged by his deeds, not by his words.

— Russian proverb


:)


So the fact that a White nation made it possible to have an Oprah Winfrey, Shaquille O Neal, Kayne West, Robert F. Smith, and Michael Jordan (among many others) to roll in the dough and inspired people like Benjamin Banneker, George Washington Carver, Granville Woods to be all they could be kind of negates any criticism that you have pretended to have a difference of opinion with me over. That's progress.

Only in America have Black people been able to flourish and prosper. That speaks highly of our system of government.
#15177539
TheResister wrote:Only in America have Black people been able to flourish and prosper.

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.

— Martin Luther King Jr.

Massachusetts Bay Colony was the first slave-holding colony in New England. Governor John Winthrop, a slave owner himself, helped write the first law legalising slavery in North America, the Massachusetts Bodies of Liberty, which the General Court passed on December 10, 1641.
Last edited by ingliz on 21 Jun 2021 12:57, edited 1 time in total.
#15177566
ckaihatsu wrote:
I'd agree that 'white supremacy' is a decent summation of the world's power structure,




The Democratic chair of the committee, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, and Democratic Senator Alex Padilla referred briefly to the Capitol Police’s contracting with a company displaying “white supremacist imagery.” No one at the hearing, including Bolton, uttered the name of the company, and Bolton made no mention of it in his prepared remarks.



https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/0 ... d-j19.html
#15177612
The Resister wrote:The liberals are doing a piss poor job of rationalizing why they hate White people so much. To hear them tell it, Blacks shouldn't go after those who sold them; the Blacks were perfectly innocent - maybe they were on the wrong side of the history books is why they lost and became slaves in the first place. It doesn't matter how it's framed, the White people are evil and I got the message loud and clear. This is just an exercise in watching the left have a melt down. The critics here are the real racists. They won't even acknowledge the history of slavery nor the fact that Whites have been slaves. Or, more importantly, Blacks have owned slaves too. Nooooo... the OP is absent and I'm sick of the pabulum puking political propaganda prostitutes here that try to justify their hatred of all White people. May they rot in Hell.

The LiberalsTM don't hate White PeopleTM.

But commercial media (what you call the Liberals) is always trying to divide populations by color, creed and language (they're doing this blatantly right now) in order to protect the Extremely RichTM from closer scrutiny. Thus we obsess about some victims, but not others. Some are always more deserving of any kind of public concern. This divides up the losers of history so that they can be dominated better by The WinnersTM.

...8...

My issue with this is that an obsession with "Flavored Victim of the Week" is a major distraction from Income Inequality - which in my opinion, is the *function* of the other two evils, racism and warfare.

Inequality is both dependent on racism-and-warfare for stolen wealth, and also feeds racism-and-warfare as a way of creating its own Giant-PitBull state leviathon.
#15177712
QatzelOk wrote:The LiberalsTM don't hate White PeopleTM.

But commercial media (what you call the Liberals) is always trying to divide populations by color, creed and language (they're doing this blatantly right now) in order to protect the Extremely RichTM from closer scrutiny. Thus we obsess about some victims, but not others. Some are always more deserving of any kind of public concern. This divides up the losers of history so that they can be dominated better by The WinnersTM.

...8...

My issue with this is that an obsession with "Flavored Victim of the Week" is a major distraction from Income Inequality - which in my opinion, is the *function* of the other two evils, racism and warfare.

Inequality is both dependent on racism-and-warfare for stolen wealth, and also feeds racism-and-warfare as a way of creating its own Giant-PitBull state leviathon.


You may not "hate" the White people, but liberals in general do hate them. We're going far astray on this thread; we're even going into areas that I cannot discuss here. Rest assured, hate is a two way street. I see it as White people in America either standing up and defending their position OR fading into the pages of history. IF there is stolen wealth, you should look to the 1 percent who control most of this country's wealth. Over 95 percent of this country's wealth resides in the hands of less that 3 percent of its population.
#15177740
The Resister wrote:Over 95 percent of this country's wealth resides in the hands of less than 3 percent of its population.

I thought you said that was a good thing previously?

The Resister wrote:That speaks highly of our system of government.
#15177742
The Resister wrote:You may not "hate" the White people, but liberals in general do hate them. We're going far astray on this thread; we're even going into areas that I cannot discuss here. Rest assured, hate is a two way street. I see it as White people in America either standing up and defending their position OR fading into the pages of history. IF there is stolen wealth, you should look to the 1 percent who control most of this country's wealth. Over 95 percent of this country's wealth resides in the hands of less that 3 percent of its population.

Neither the top 3% nor even the top 1% have "stolen" their wealth - they acquired it perfectly legally through the normal operations of the capitalist mode of economic production. If you have a problem with that, then you have a problem with capitalism itself.
#15177970
ingliz wrote:I thought you said that was a good thing previously?


Do you smoke dope or is that natural for you? You advocate penalizing innocent people for the alleged wrongs of people unconnected to a legal enterprise that the first Americans did not invent and were the first to abolish. You need to get real.
#15177972
Potemkin wrote:Neither the top 3% nor even the top 1% have "stolen" their wealth - they acquired it perfectly legally through the normal operations of the capitalist mode of economic production. If you have a problem with that, then you have a problem with capitalism itself.


And much of the money that is acquired by billionaires is done with the help of some form of slavery. The way you've been attacking me, I'd say YOU have the problem.
#15177977
The Resister wrote:And much of the money that is acquired by billionaires is done with the help of some form of slavery. The way you've been attacking me, I'd say YOU have the problem.

Can you specify precisely how, say, Bill Gates or Elon Musk acquired their billions through slavery? :eh:
#15178041
Potemkin wrote:Can you specify precisely how, say, Bill Gates or Elon Musk acquired their billions through slavery? :eh:


I could probably follow the money trail, but I'm not getting paid to do it AND this thread isn't about that either. You apologize for the billionaires making their money off the sweat of others and I only say that proves the point. When the Black people have the opportunity, they choose slavery. That's why they vote for Democrats.
#15178042
ckaihatsu wrote:Why Many Americans Can’t See The Wealth Gap Between White And Black America

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... ealth-gap/


It appears to me that you're straying way off topic - and to what end? The problem the social engineers have is to explain why Black people need the validation of Whites in order to build their own version of the American dream. That slavery B.S. is only good for so many generations and so many preferential opportunities. Essentially what the Black and liberal leaders are saying is that the Black race cannot be fully validated until every White is either dead or a slave.

That is as much a racist postulate as are segregated neighborhoods.
#15178047
The Resister wrote:
It appears to me that you're straying way off topic -



It's not off-topic to discuss racism and the exponentially unequal wealth distribution in this country. Remember *this* -- ?


The Resister wrote:
IF there is stolen wealth, you should look to the 1 percent who control most of this country's wealth. Over 95 percent of this country's wealth resides in the hands of less that 3 percent of its population.



viewtopic.php?p=15177712#p15177712



---


The Resister wrote:
and to what end?



The 'end' is to posit, and establish, that U.S. society is both elitist and racist.


The Resister wrote:
The problem the social engineers have is to explain why Black people need the validation of Whites in order to build their own version of the American dream.



This is an obvious red herring, and I doubt that the average black person in the U.S. chases after 'social validation' from whites, though it may happen on the whole *culturally* due to the systematic dispossession of cultural minorities (blacks, women, gays, etc.), from the privileged and enfranchised white male cultural-hegemonic narratives.

Who, or what kind, of 'social engineer' were you thinking of here?


The Resister wrote:
That slavery B.S. is only good for so many generations and so many preferential opportunities. Essentially what the Black and liberal leaders are saying is that the Black race cannot be fully validated until every White is either dead or a slave.



Don't you think that this is quite an *exaggeration*, that's *hyperbolic* -- ?


The Resister wrote:
That is as much a racist postulate as are segregated neighborhoods.



It's actually a *strawman* -- you're creating such an exaggerated contrived monstrosity of a formulation that you then get to be the superhero, swooping in to karate-kick it cartoonishly into nothingness.

But no social justice reformer is calling for the tit-for-tat retributive genocide of *whites*, wholesale.

You're correct to bring up segregated neighborhoods, since that's what followed after slavery:



Jim Crow laws were state and local laws that enforced racial segregation in the Southern United States and elsewhere within the United States.[1][2] These laws were enacted in the late 19th and early 20th centuries by white Southern Democrat-dominated state legislatures to disenfranchise and remove political and economic gains made by black people during the Reconstruction period.[3] Jim Crow laws were enforced until 1965.[4]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws
#15178049
ckaihatsu wrote:It's not off-topic to discuss racism and the exponentially unequal wealth distribution in this country. Remember *this* -- ?







---





The 'end' is to posit, and establish, that U.S. society is both elitist and racist.





This is an obvious red herring, and I doubt that the average black person in the U.S. chases after 'social validation' from whites, though it may happen on the whole *culturally* due to the systematic dispossession of cultural minorities (blacks, women, gays, etc.), from the privileged and enfranchised white male cultural-hegemonic narratives.

Who, or what kind, of 'social engineer' were you thinking of here?





Don't you think that this is quite an *exaggeration*, that's *hyperbolic* -- ?





It's actually a *strawman* -- you're creating such an exaggerated contrived monstrosity of a formulation that you then get to be the superhero, swooping in to karate-kick it cartoonishly into nothingness.

But no social justice reformer is calling for the tit-for-tat retributive genocide of *whites*, wholesale.

You're correct to bring up segregated neighborhoods, since that's what followed after slavery:


I think you are out of touch with reality. I am at a disadvantage here as I've been warned by the board's owner where NOT to go in these discussions. Suffice it to say, I have personally appeared opposite the late Hosea Williams, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and several others on television and radio arguing over racial subject matter. I know full well what they think.

The liberals are going to milk the slavery narrative for all the mileage they can get out of it. My purpose on this thread was to let you know, others have suffered due to slavery, but got back up and rose above it. Look, I'm not here to blow smoke up anybody's ass. Every honest White person knows exactly WHY America came into being. There is not one, single, solitary, thing one can say about Whites that they cannot honestly and logically defend from the Bible. The more dishonest ones try to sugarcoat it and if I told you the harsh, hard core truth, it would be the last post I made here.

I see no point in dancing around with you. You are going to support a dishonest narrative because it works. We both know you don't give a shit about the truth and I'm just here, defending what I've already stated. If we were on a level playing field, this would be a different discussion. Having gone as far as one can, we are out of stuff to discuss. You can't stay on topic because the facts don't support your case so you have to move into subject matter that isn't allowed to be discussed on over 98 percent of social media.
#15178054
The Resister wrote:There is not one, single, solitary, thing one can say about Whites that they cannot honestly and logically defend from the Bible

So, what you are saying is a pedophile cursing after being caught having drunken sex with his grandson is biblical enough to justify racialized slavery?

In flagrante delicto. Genesis IX:18–27... 'The Curse of Ham.'

a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

I would be grateful if you could walk us through that.

* Of course, you could argue that the past is a different country and the patriarch must be obeyed, even if it meant taking one up the arse when he got pissed, but that doesn't help you here. The Buggery Act of 1533 criminalized homosexual activity.

** Pedophilia? The text has a certain ambiguity, but it is the most logical reading. Noah curses his grandson Canaan, not Ham.


a level playing field

"the typical White family has eight times the wealth of the typical Black family and five times the wealth of the typical Hispanic family."

Disparities in Wealth by Race and Ethnicity in the 2019 Survey of Consumer Finances
#15178096
ingliz wrote:In flagrante delicto... 'The Curse of Ham.'

A pedophile's curses, when caught in a drunken sex act, justify racialized slavery?

a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

— Genesis IX:18–27

I would be grateful if you could walk us through that.

* Of course, you could argue that the past is a different country and the patriarch must be obeyed, even if it meant taking one up the arse when he got pissed, but that doesn't help you here. The Buggery Act of 1533 criminalized homosexual activity.

** Pedophilia? The text has a certain ambiguity, but it is the most logical reading. Noah curses his grandson Canaan, not Ham.



"the typical White family has eight times the wealth of the typical Black family and five times the wealth of the typical Hispanic family."

Disparities in Wealth by Race and Ethnicity in the 2019 Survey of Consumer Finances



What do you want to be walked through? I said it in unequivocal terminology and let me say it again for you: In an of itself, there is nothing immoral about slavery. As a matter of fact let's be accurate and honest. You'd rather have me banned here than to be academically honest, so WTH. It's your board.

Although God liberated the Israelites from slavery in Egypt, slavery is not universally prohibited in the Bible. Slavery was permissible in certain situations, so long as slaves were regarded as full members of the community (Gen. 17:12), received the same rest periods and holidays as non-slaves (Exod. 23:12; Deut. 5:14-15, 12:12), and were treated humanely (Exod. 21:7, 26-27). But, what about Black slaves?

America was founded on Christian principles, so we had a different kind of situation. Since we were not founded as a theocracy and not everybody was a practicing Christian, you found a wide range of views regarding slaves. Unlike the civilizations of places like China or people living in the Middle East, the Black people did not have what one would consider a modern civilization for the times. Black people sold their brethren into slavery and, honestly, many Whites viewed the Black people as a pre-Adamic being that was destined to be a servant race. OTOH, despite the laws that came from Great Britain AND kept intact by some of the colonists, a majority of slave owners treated slaves in accordance with the laws of the Bible with regard to owning slaves.

At the end of the day, the Black people who were slaves in the United States got a far better deal than they would have gotten from their Black brethren captors, had they not been sold into slavery. Additionally, once the slaves arrived in America, slave buyers preferred to buy the Black people in family lots. Families were happier and more productive. Facts bear out that Black slaves ate better, dressed better, had better medical care, better housing, and even got paid more than their White skin, blue collar counterparts that were indentured slaves. Since slavery is not condemned (for most) I'm not going to pretend to voice an objective opinion either way.

I think that you read the sermon "A Model of Christian Charity" by John Winthrop (IIRC you quoted from it earlier). If not, you can always access and read it. A significant number of colonists believed in the same things that Winthrop did. They believed Whites were the Israelites and are the chosen of God; they believed this land to be the new Jerusalem; they believed that Israelites are NOT to be held in bondage... not to each other and not slaves or property of the government. They fought a war on that premise. Those that came after people like Winthrop had a more secular belief about the Bible and by the time of Jefferson, they were willing to extend unalienable Rights to Black people. Having unalienable Rights, however, does not entitle one to become a citizen nor to vote in elections. Citizenship and voting are privileges that are created by the government and extended to people by way of PRIVILEGE, not Right.

The idea that Whites are biblical Israel and this is the New Jerusalem led to the first immigration law being put into place only mere weeks after the ratification of the Constitution of the United States. The first immigration law limited citizenship to "free white persons." In the Preamble to the Constitution, it reads (in part): "provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity..."

The terminology "ourselves and our Posterity" referred to members of the White race. That was the holding by Chief Justice Roger Taney in Dred Scott v. Sanford (see https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/60/393)

The truth outraged the multiculturalists so much that they illegally ratified the 14th Amendment through the Republicans. Interestingly, Black people bitch about slavery, but turned their backs on the Republican Party and today belong to the Democrats. The Democrats were the ones that wanted segregation and White supremacy. Slavery had ended, so now, the globalists conned the multiculturalists into the idea that Blacks should be citizens. The real motivation behind the passage of the 14th Amendment was to repeal the Bill of Rights (which is a discussion for a different thread), but now we are to have forced equality.

This is where you don't need to try and blow smoke up my ass. Democrats have always been about supremacy and control; slavery and the government ownership of human beings. And where do you find the bulk of the Black race today? They're Democrats! They want to reign supreme and, consequently, they have removed the White man's flags, statues, monuments, memorials, and plaques. They are going to take the White man's picture off our currency and they are replacing our holidays with racially charged holidays aimed at instilling a false guilt complex into Whites and erasing every vestige of the White peoples culture and heritage. They even advocate getting rid of our American flag:

https://americascitizenpress.com/this-s ... ican-flag/

What the multiculturalists want is a White free world. What we see today is a war of genocide because we will not be able to retain our culture, heritage, and history while moving forward. My view is, if we're going to live in the past, let's live in the past. How about reparations MY family should be getting for being held into bondage by (supposedly) Black people for over 400 years, who claim to be the original Egyptians? Be sensible. Over 90 percent of the White people of today are NOT the same people as the colonists. Immigration and inter-racial marriage have polluted the gene pool so that most Whites you have are not the same people that had any influence in slavery. The overwhelming majority of the White people in the United States can trace their history back to White enslavement. I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but Black people simply do not have a monopoly on human suffering. But, far more important, when given the privilege of voting, the majority of the Black people vote FOR human enslavement. Of course, they are owned by a government god that gives them the illusion that they had they voted for their leaders. It is what it is and you can't change it. You can keep up the filibuster until Hell freezes over, but I can tell you what it is like to be a slave and I can tell you what it's like to be free. And, in America, you can be choose to be free and you can make the life you want. But, what a lot of people what they want is to be dominated and owned by government. It's just not for me.
  • 1
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 26

@Drlee , I didn't say efforts shouldn't be made t[…]

The tribes challenged the Removal Act. In 1832, […]

https://i.imgur.com/fBZLjk4.jpg […]

@late I agree, you got to have a reliable poli[…]