Page 2 of 2
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sat Jun 29, 2013 7:18 pm
by greenoaks
i enjoyed the history lesson. will there be more?
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sat Jun 29, 2013 7:29 pm
by Lootifer
Night Strike wrote:Nola_Lifer wrote:Seems history shows that Night Strike is still racist as all hell.
In what way?
The fact that you feel you need to isolate this one rather insignificant fact out of all the historical inaccuracies speaks volumes on where your priorities lie.
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sat Jun 29, 2013 7:36 pm
by Lootifer
Also I really like how indentured servants are not slaves...
lolwut
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 7:37 am
by notyou2
Lootifer wrote:Night Strike wrote:Nola_Lifer wrote:Seems history shows that Night Strike is still racist as all hell.
In what way?
The fact that you feel you need to isolate this one rather insignificant fact out of all the historical inaccuracies speaks volumes on where your priorities lie.
It's not his fault. It's HIS fault. His religion made him this way.
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 7:54 am
by PLAYER57832
notyou2 wrote:Lootifer wrote:Night Strike wrote:Nola_Lifer wrote:Seems history shows that Night Strike is still racist as all hell.
In what way?
The fact that you feel you need to isolate this one rather insignificant fact out of all the historical inaccuracies speaks volumes on where your priorities lie.
It's not his fault. It's HIS fault. His religion made him this way.
No, but his understanding of his religion, perhaps. There is currently no "church of Nightstrike".
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 7:55 am
by PLAYER57832
notyou2 wrote:Lootifer wrote:Night Strike wrote:Nola_Lifer wrote:Seems history shows that Night Strike is still racist as all hell.
In what way?
The fact that you feel you need to isolate this one rather insignificant fact out of all the historical inaccuracies speaks volumes on where your priorities lie.
It's not his fault. It's HIS fault. His religion made him this way.
No, but his understanding of his religion, perhaps. There is currently no "church of Nightstrike".
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 7:58 am
by PLAYER57832
Lootifer wrote:Also I really like how indentured servants are not slaves...
lolwut
They were not, because they entered into it "voluntarily" (often to pay for passage here, for example) and because there was always at least the theory of working off the debt and obtaining freedom. Even if the freedom was sometimes more reality than illusion, the fact that it was there did make a difference. Also, there tended to be more limits on how indentured servants could be treated, though just like in slavery (or paid work, for that matter) they were often abused
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 9:59 am
by pimpdave
The bosses of indentured servants would often find ways to extend the debt, just like modern usurers. Like, say the servant needed room and board once here, well, the boss would supply it, but guess what?
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:18 am
by Iliad
Also the working conditions and life expectancy meant that your chance of actually survivign those 7 years were very low especially given that your masters who were in charge of your well-being had no actual incentives to keep you alive.
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:36 am
by hotfire
Iliad wrote:Also the working conditions and life expectancy meant that your chance of actually survivign those 7 years were very low especially given that your masters who were in charge of your well-being had no actual incentives to keep you alive.
and modern farmers have no actual incentives to keep their livestock alive
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:40 am
by Phatscotty
warmonger1981 wrote:Were there not slaves all throughout history far before America came to be? Egypt or Rome maybe? Slavery is used as a tool for political and religious gain.
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:43 am
by Phatscotty
It used to be a rough world, eh?
What a mistake it continues to be judging all of history through the rosiest colored lens's possible
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 10:44 am
by Iliad
Phatscotty wrote:It used to be a rough world, eh?
What a mistake it continues to be judging all of history through the rosiest colored lens's possible
What on earth are you trying to imply with this? You're clearly philosophising about something.
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 11:03 am
by AndyDufresne
Iliad wrote:Phatscotty wrote:It used to be a rough world, eh?
What a mistake it continues to be judging all of history through the rosiest colored lens's possible
What on earth are you trying to imply with this? You're clearly philosophising about something.
Is he saying that today is equally as tough? I am not sure.
--Andy
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 5:19 pm
by Lootifer
Phatscotty wrote:It used to be a rough world, eh?
What a mistake it continues to be judging all of history through the rosiest colored lens's possible
Not trying to nitpick but those two comments dont match up.
Firstly I agree, the world used to be pretty dire, especially prior to the industrial revolution (or more specifically the internal combustion engine and domestic electricity). Living was hard, and people were much tougher as a result.
But your second comment is odd; who are these people judging history with rose tinted glasses?
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 6:09 pm
by PLAYER57832
Iliad wrote:Also the working conditions and life expectancy meant that your chance of actually survivign those 7 years were very low especially given that your masters who were in charge of your well-being had no actual incentives to keep you alive.
Yes, but the chances of even "free" working folks was generally low, too.
I am not saying their life was wonderful at all, just that it was not true slavery. But, ironically, as bad as their life could be, some folks who were slaves led better lives than free folks and/or indentured servants. In ALL cases, conditions had to do more with the master than the label attached to the worker.
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 6:38 pm
by Woodruff
Lootifer wrote:But your second comment is odd; who are these people judging history with rose tinted glasses?
Anyone who doesn't agree with him.
Drunk Phatscotty was better, even if his spelling was worse.
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 8:23 pm
by AAFitz
Actually, Id like to defend NS here for showing the most non-racist post he has ever posted, in showing that indeed some africans can be just as evil as some of other races, especially the white ones.
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2013 9:19 pm
by BigBallinStalin
AAFitz wrote:Actually, Id like to defend NS here for showing the most non-racist post he has ever posted, in showing that indeed some africans can be just as evil as some of other races,
especially the white ones.
Prejudice.
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 1:53 am
by Iliad
BigBallinStalin wrote:AAFitz wrote:Actually, Id like to defend NS here for showing the most non-racist post he has ever posted, in showing that indeed some africans can be just as evil as some of other races,
especially the white ones.
Prejudice.
Indeed, the worst prejudice white people can face is sometimes being reminded of the institutional racism that were the foundation blocks for their nations.
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 2:20 am
by chang50
None of the OP is earth-shattering news,in fact a good proportion of the slaves that ended up in the US were bought in West Africa from,shock horror,black people,it was easier than catching them.Native Americans dabbled in slavery as well.It was commonplace until recently in large parts of the world,and hasn't been completely eradicated even now.The implication is that people somehow think only Caucasians have owned slaves,even just in the Colonial US,but why?
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2013 5:30 am
by Metsfanmax
Iliad wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:AAFitz wrote:Actually, Id like to defend NS here for showing the most non-racist post he has ever posted, in showing that indeed some africans can be just as evil as some of other races,
especially the white ones.
Prejudice.
Indeed, the worst prejudice white people can face is sometimes being reminded of the institutional racism that were the foundation blocks for their nations.
Is it bad that I first read this as "foundation blacks for their nations?"
Re: First Slave Owner in Colonial US
Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2013 5:10 pm
by notyou2
PLAYER57832 wrote:notyou2 wrote:Lootifer wrote:Night Strike wrote:Nola_Lifer wrote:Seems history shows that Night Strike is still racist as all hell.
In what way?
The fact that you feel you need to isolate this one rather insignificant fact out of all the historical inaccuracies speaks volumes on where your priorities lie.
It's not his fault. It's HIS fault. His religion made him this way.
No, but his understanding of his religion, perhaps. There is currently no "church of Nightstrike".
I believe you are misinterpreting what I wrote.
I am trying to say that Nightstrike's religion influenced him in his racism, not that he made his own religion.