Did African-American Slaves Rebel?

[IM2]

Just be quiet and learn the different types of slavery. When women get equal rights as granted by the constitution, let me know.

Please post a list of rights that don't apply to women and blacks.

Not until you do this.

Prove when racism ended and its effects were allayed. Show, with data and peer-reviewed studies supporting your argument, when the effects of the hundreds of years of anti-Black racism from chattel slavery through Old Jim Crow leveled off. Show when the wealth expropriated during that oppression was repaid to those it was expropriated from and through. And remember, after you’ve addressed the end of anti-Black racism you’ll still have to explain when anti-Latinx, anti-Asian, anti-Arab, and anti-Native racism came to an end as well.

What makes most sense is, you are a USMB Live Action Role-Player who approaches online political discussions in a manner similar to players of pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons. You use identity politics and historical revisionism in place of the many sided dice, and after creation of so many anti-Caucasian, poor oppressed African American thread-campaigns, have risen to the rank of level 35 or so Black Racist Dungeon Master.

Failing the above to be the actual case, then in the possible second explanation for your rants we are much alike you and I in that I also arrived at USMB born out of a need to relieve frustration over the American prevailing political and cultural winds driving me out of my mind with pent up agitation of the intellectual digestion these last several years. Meaning USMB has, for me, become an outlet not unlike kicking a tree, albeit one which requires purchase of far fewer pairs of new boots. Be that the case, then I suppose there's no real harm done in your chosen flavor of dialectic here on-the-line with the rest of us tree-kickers.

However, if you are speaking from either the heart or what you IRL define as intellectual honesty then said intellect belongs to a weak, misled mind fraught with vengeance and an in-chains servant of a Democratic party narrative long running to the tune of continuing the oppression of African Americans. A narrative of being used for perpetuating race warfare to divide Americans against each other by skin tone; a narrative of chaining the African American mind and keeping it so for eternity, for the purpose of exploiting it for political currency.

Your ancestor's bodies were freed from slavery many decades ago. Isn't it time to free your mind from intellectual chains of thought--the way your ancestors were freed from iron chains? You do them a great disservice whining and complaining about the inability to afford expensive sneakers or fear of a white man looking at you funny, in the face of the violent physical hell they endured under actual slavery.

Further, young African Americans killing each other in our streets over those $500 pairs of sneakers; over packets of white powder; over ownership of a city block: surely you're once enslaved ancestors would be quite ashamed at how some of their future generations have wasted their freedom--particularly when engaging some places in America in rampant cultural self-destruction.

Your problem is, is that you identify with some massive hive group of people who share the same or similar skin tone, rather than identify yourself and other African Americans as individuals. I am guessing it's easier that way for some of you to kill each other, right, because you're not killing another individual, just another small piece of a millions strong group and there's plenty more pieces where that one came from. That is the exact self-genocidal belief Democrat identity politics has brainwashed you to hold, think and act on.

In both the faces, souls and context of entire American indigenous peoples who now exist solely in the genetic material of hybrid progeny, your arguments are disgraceful, intellectually lacking, stereotypically predictable, and dishonest as possible in their reliance on revisionist history.

In your mind you still view yourself as an oppressed slave owned by a white dominated cultural and political dynasty you must forever seek vengeance upon to fill the non-existent void in your culture's soul. A dark, swirling non-existent void chiseled there by a combination of political exploitation, generational following of a religion of deception known as coerced race warfare and the relentless pop cultural, media and political inspired need to self-martyrize and self-destruct for the pity of history. Just remember, history is pitiless enough in its truthful retelling. Revising it will only serve to weaken your case for forgiveness in the eyes of your ancestors.

Lastly, slavery as a civilizational institution is as primeval as the professions of prostitution and assassination. The disingenuousness of the claim that African American slavery is somehow more amorally profound does great disservice to the historically countless slaves of all civilizations since time out of mind. Your own mock or misled into genuine modern outcry and reverse racism over your ancestor's small historical chapter of all slavery is had for one true purpose: for politicization of their horrible plight as a weapon to use against opposing political and cultural ideologies; but most of all for justification of Black racism.

Shamefully ironic.

Another example of how deep the psychosis is in some whites.

 

[Hiryuu]

Or we can get the government to write the rules so we can have everything. Just like whites did.

Well, I guess that would make you equal, in depravity (not suggesting that would be a goal of very high esteem). It would however, show that what you have learned from white people falls a little short of any noble endeavor. As long as you are looking for a victory in racial depravity, you cannot complain when everything turns to crap (well, actually you could complain, but that would really make you look stupid if you did).

 

[Muhammed]

That's the thing about this discussion. No one has ever said every white person had it easy. But it is documented that no white person, perhaps with the exception of independent thinking white females, had it worse than blacks and people of color.

If anyone said that, it would be a lie.

You appear to be trying to play the role of a professional victim. Could you explain why you would think that that's a good idea?

 

[AveryJarhman]

It appears that many whites here need to earn the true history of life in America.
Did African-American Slaves Rebel?
by Henry Louis Gates, Jr

One of the most pernicious allegations made against the African-American people was that our slave ancestors were either exceptionally “docile” or “content and loyal,” thus explaining their purported failure to rebel extensively. Some even compare enslaved Americans to their brothers and sisters in Brazil, Cuba, Suriname and Haiti, the last of whom defeated the most powerful army in the world, Napoleon’s army, becoming the first slaves in history to successfully strike a blow for their own freedom.

As the historian Herbert Aptheker informs us in American Negro Slave Revolts, no one put this dishonest, nakedly pro-slavery argument more baldly than the Harvard historian James Schouler in 1882, who attributed this spurious conclusion to ” ‘the innate patience, docility, and child-like simplicity of the negro’ ” who, he felt, was an ” ‘imitator and non-moralist,’ ” learning ” ‘deceit and libertinism with facility,’ ” being ” ‘easily intimidated, incapable of deep plots’ “; in short, Negroes were ” ‘a black servile race, sensuous, stupid, brutish, obedient to the whip, children in imagination.’ ”

Consider how bizarre this was: It wasn’t enough that slaves had been subjugated under a harsh and brutal regime for two and a half centuries; following the collapse of Reconstruction, this school of historians — unapologetically supportive of slavery — kicked the slaves again for not rising up more frequently to kill their oppressive masters. And lest we think that this phenomenon was relegated to 19th- and early 20th-century scholars, as late as 1959, Stanley Elkins drew a picture of the slaves as infantilized “Sambos” in his book Slavery: A Problem in American Institutional and Intellectual Life, reduced to the status of the passive, “perpetual child” by the severely oppressive form of American slavery, and thus unable to rebel. Rarely can I think of a colder, nastier set of claims than these about the lack of courage or “manhood” of the African-American slaves.

So, did African-American slaves rebel? Of course they did. As early as 1934, our old friend Joel A. Rogers identified 33 slave revolts, including Nat Turner’s, in his 100 Amazing Facts. And nine years later, the historian Herbert Aptheker published his pioneering study, American Negro Slave Revolts, to set the record straight. Aptheker defined a slave revolt as an action involving 10 or more slaves, with “freedom as the apparent aim [and] contemporary references labeling the event as an uprising, plot, insurrection, or the equivalent of these.” In all, Aptheker says, he “has found records of approximately two hundred and fifty revolts and conspiracies in the history of American Negro slavery.” Other scholars have found as many as 313.

The Five Greatest Slave Rebellions in the United States | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

Hello, IM2. Doesn't this topic belong in the USMB History forum?

IM2, would you know if back in the day, did Africans captured and sold as slaves by African tribal leaders, REBELLED against the African tribal leaders who sold them into what would later become a better life?

Regarding the Historical info you shared. During that period of human evolution, were African people complicit in the North American slave trade?

Africans started slavery - how it REALLY happened - YouTube



African American Lives 2 . Profiles . Tom Joyner | PBS

Larry Elder - Slavery: What They Didn't Teach in My High School

Peace.

 

[IM2]

Pope Nicolas V and the Portuguese Slave Trade

With Portugal’s expansion into western Africa in the fifteenth century, Iberian merchants began to recognize the economic potential of a large-scale slave trafficking enterprise. One of the first to record this sentiment, according to Portuguese royal chronicler Gomes Eanes de Zurara, was a young ship captain named Antam Gonçalvez, who sailed to West Africa in 1441 hoping to acquire seal skins and oil. After obtaining his cargo, Gonçalvez called a meeting of the twenty-one sailors who accompanied him and unveiled his plan to increase their profits. According to Zurara, Gonçalvez told his crew, “we have already got our cargo, but how fair a thing would it be if we, who have come to this land for a cargo of such petty merchandise, were to meet with good fortune and bring the first captives before the presence of our Prince?” That night, Gonçalvez led a raiding party into Cap Blanc, a narrow peninsula between Western Sahara and Mauritania, and kidnapped two Berbers, one man and one woman. Another Portuguese mariner, Nuno Tristão, and members of his crew soon joined Gonçalvez. Although the raid resulted in less than a dozen captives, Zurara imagines in his account that prince Henry of Portugal responded to this enterprise with, “joy, not so much for the number of captives taken, but for prospect of other [countless] captives that could be taken.”

While Gonçalvez’s voyage in 1441 is widely considered to mark the beginnings of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, it may also be viewed as an extension of an older tradition of raiding and ransom on both shores of the Mediterranean. Upon returning to Portugal, Gonçalvez treated his captives in accordance with this custom, and allowed them to negotiate the terms of their release. Rather than offering a ransom of money, the captives promised to give Gonçalvez ten slaves in exchange for their own freedom and safe passage home. According to royal chronicler Zurara, the Berbers explained that these new captives would be “black [and] not of the lineage of Moors, but Gentiles.” Thus in 1442, Gonçalvez returned his Berber captives to Western Sahara, receiving as payment ten enslaved sub-Saharan Africans, whom he then transported back to Portugal for re-sale.

Pope Nicolas V and the Portuguese Slave Trade · African Laborers for a New Empire: Iberia, Slavery, and the Atlantic World · Lowcountry Digital History Initiative

 

[SweetSue92]

It appears that many whites here need to earn the true history of life in America.
Did African-American Slaves Rebel?
by Henry Louis Gates, Jr

One of the most pernicious allegations made against the African-American people was that our slave ancestors were either exceptionally “docile” or “content and loyal,” thus explaining their purported failure to rebel extensively. Some even compare enslaved Americans to their brothers and sisters in Brazil, Cuba, Suriname and Haiti, the last of whom defeated the most powerful army in the world, Napoleon’s army, becoming the first slaves in history to successfully strike a blow for their own freedom.

As the historian Herbert Aptheker informs us in American Negro Slave Revolts, no one put this dishonest, nakedly pro-slavery argument more baldly than the Harvard historian James Schouler in 1882, who attributed this spurious conclusion to ” ‘the innate patience, docility, and child-like simplicity of the negro’ ” who, he felt, was an ” ‘imitator and non-moralist,’ ” learning ” ‘deceit and libertinism with facility,’ ” being ” ‘easily intimidated, incapable of deep plots’ “; in short, Negroes were ” ‘a black servile race, sensuous, stupid, brutish, obedient to the whip, children in imagination.’ ”

Consider how bizarre this was: It wasn’t enough that slaves had been subjugated under a harsh and brutal regime for two and a half centuries; following the collapse of Reconstruction, this school of historians — unapologetically supportive of slavery — kicked the slaves again for not rising up more frequently to kill their oppressive masters. And lest we think that this phenomenon was relegated to 19th- and early 20th-century scholars, as late as 1959, Stanley Elkins drew a picture of the slaves as infantilized “Sambos” in his book Slavery: A Problem in American Institutional and Intellectual Life, reduced to the status of the passive, “perpetual child” by the severely oppressive form of American slavery, and thus unable to rebel. Rarely can I think of a colder, nastier set of claims than these about the lack of courage or “manhood” of the African-American slaves.

So, did African-American slaves rebel? Of course they did. As early as 1934, our old friend Joel A. Rogers identified 33 slave revolts, including Nat Turner’s, in his 100 Amazing Facts. And nine years later, the historian Herbert Aptheker published his pioneering study, American Negro Slave Revolts, to set the record straight. Aptheker defined a slave revolt as an action involving 10 or more slaves, with “freedom as the apparent aim [and] contemporary references labeling the event as an uprising, plot, insurrection, or the equivalent of these.” In all, Aptheker says, he “has found records of approximately two hundred and fifty revolts and conspiracies in the history of American Negro slavery.” Other scholars have found as many as 313.

The Five Greatest Slave Rebellions in the United States | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

Just one thing to address here. I don't know how ignorant you have to be to think a people who basically gave us all of American music except maybe classical composers and bluegrass were "stupid, brutish....children in imagination."

I do not happen to think that music is an aside, btw. I think it changes the world. American music is now at the forefront of the entire world. The oppressed people in slavery basically invented it. So, there is that. Children in imagination is just beyond ignorant.

Ask the other whites here that.

K some of the whites here are clearly racists. That's unfortunate. They have to live with their own dark hearts. I do not, and neither do you--unless you choose it. Why are you choosing it?

 

[dave p]

Blacks during the days of slavery became used to having free housing and food provided for them by white people.

What legacy it still carried on today, with most black people living in rent free section 8 houses and given food stamps to feed themselves. ....

27% or so live in poverty, so how do you figure that?

They can avail themselves of work just like every other race and creed.

Or we can get the government to write the rules so we can have everything. Just like whites did.

The rules have been rewritten. Everyone is in an even playing field.

 

[MizMolly]

Just be quiet and learn the different types of slavery. When women get equal rights as granted by the constitution, let me know.

Please post a list of rights that don't apply to women and blacks.

Not until you do this.

Prove when racism ended and its effects were allayed. Show, with data and peer-reviewed studies supporting your argument, when the effects of the hundreds of years of anti-Black racism from chattel slavery through Old Jim Crow leveled off. Show when the wealth expropriated during that oppression was repaid to those it was expropriated from and through. And remember, after you’ve addressed the end of anti-Black racism you’ll still have to explain when anti-Latinx, anti-Asian, anti-Arab, and anti-Native racism came to an end as well.

You spew the same drivel. Racism hasnt ended, but whites arent the only racists. You keep living in the past.

 

[IM2]

It appears that many whites here need to earn the true history of life in America.
Did African-American Slaves Rebel?
by Henry Louis Gates, Jr

One of the most pernicious allegations made against the African-American people was that our slave ancestors were either exceptionally “docile” or “content and loyal,” thus explaining their purported failure to rebel extensively. Some even compare enslaved Americans to their brothers and sisters in Brazil, Cuba, Suriname and Haiti, the last of whom defeated the most powerful army in the world, Napoleon’s army, becoming the first slaves in history to successfully strike a blow for their own freedom.

As the historian Herbert Aptheker informs us in American Negro Slave Revolts, no one put this dishonest, nakedly pro-slavery argument more baldly than the Harvard historian James Schouler in 1882, who attributed this spurious conclusion to ” ‘the innate patience, docility, and child-like simplicity of the negro’ ” who, he felt, was an ” ‘imitator and non-moralist,’ ” learning ” ‘deceit and libertinism with facility,’ ” being ” ‘easily intimidated, incapable of deep plots’ “; in short, Negroes were ” ‘a black servile race, sensuous, stupid, brutish, obedient to the whip, children in imagination.’ ”

Consider how bizarre this was: It wasn’t enough that slaves had been subjugated under a harsh and brutal regime for two and a half centuries; following the collapse of Reconstruction, this school of historians — unapologetically supportive of slavery — kicked the slaves again for not rising up more frequently to kill their oppressive masters. And lest we think that this phenomenon was relegated to 19th- and early 20th-century scholars, as late as 1959, Stanley Elkins drew a picture of the slaves as infantilized “Sambos” in his book Slavery: A Problem in American Institutional and Intellectual Life, reduced to the status of the passive, “perpetual child” by the severely oppressive form of American slavery, and thus unable to rebel. Rarely can I think of a colder, nastier set of claims than these about the lack of courage or “manhood” of the African-American slaves.

So, did African-American slaves rebel? Of course they did. As early as 1934, our old friend Joel A. Rogers identified 33 slave revolts, including Nat Turner’s, in his 100 Amazing Facts. And nine years later, the historian Herbert Aptheker published his pioneering study, American Negro Slave Revolts, to set the record straight. Aptheker defined a slave revolt as an action involving 10 or more slaves, with “freedom as the apparent aim [and] contemporary references labeling the event as an uprising, plot, insurrection, or the equivalent of these.” In all, Aptheker says, he “has found records of approximately two hundred and fifty revolts and conspiracies in the history of American Negro slavery.” Other scholars have found as many as 313.

The Five Greatest Slave Rebellions in the United States | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

Just one thing to address here. I don't know how ignorant you have to be to think a people who basically gave us all of American music except maybe classical composers and bluegrass were "stupid, brutish....children in imagination."

I do not happen to think that music is an aside, btw. I think it changes the world. American music is now at the forefront of the entire world. The oppressed people in slavery basically invented it. So, there is that. Children in imagination is just beyond ignorant.

Ask the other whites here that.

K some of the whites here are clearly racists. That's unfortunate. They have to live with their own dark hearts. I do not, and neither do you--unless you choose it. Why are you choosing it?

What exactly am I choosing?

 

[IM2]

Blacks during the days of slavery became used to having free housing and food provided for them by white people.

What legacy it still carried on today, with most black people living in rent free section 8 houses and given food stamps to feed themselves. ....

27% or so live in poverty, so how do you figure that?

They can avail themselves of work just like every other race and creed.

Or we can get the government to write the rules so we can have everything. Just like whites did.

The rules have been rewritten. Everyone is in an even playing field.

You are insane. The field is not level, it cannot be level when the rules were re written after whites had a 188 year head start. And then we have the matter of hw the so called "re written" rules not being followed. Or complaints of how the "re written" rules discriminate against whites when they don't.

 

[SweetSue92]

It appears that many whites here need to earn the true history of life in America.
Did African-American Slaves Rebel?
by Henry Louis Gates, Jr

One of the most pernicious allegations made against the African-American people was that our slave ancestors were either exceptionally “docile” or “content and loyal,” thus explaining their purported failure to rebel extensively. Some even compare enslaved Americans to their brothers and sisters in Brazil, Cuba, Suriname and Haiti, the last of whom defeated the most powerful army in the world, Napoleon’s army, becoming the first slaves in history to successfully strike a blow for their own freedom.

As the historian Herbert Aptheker informs us in American Negro Slave Revolts, no one put this dishonest, nakedly pro-slavery argument more baldly than the Harvard historian James Schouler in 1882, who attributed this spurious conclusion to ” ‘the innate patience, docility, and child-like simplicity of the negro’ ” who, he felt, was an ” ‘imitator and non-moralist,’ ” learning ” ‘deceit and libertinism with facility,’ ” being ” ‘easily intimidated, incapable of deep plots’ “; in short, Negroes were ” ‘a black servile race, sensuous, stupid, brutish, obedient to the whip, children in imagination.’ ”

Consider how bizarre this was: It wasn’t enough that slaves had been subjugated under a harsh and brutal regime for two and a half centuries; following the collapse of Reconstruction, this school of historians — unapologetically supportive of slavery — kicked the slaves again for not rising up more frequently to kill their oppressive masters. And lest we think that this phenomenon was relegated to 19th- and early 20th-century scholars, as late as 1959, Stanley Elkins drew a picture of the slaves as infantilized “Sambos” in his book Slavery: A Problem in American Institutional and Intellectual Life, reduced to the status of the passive, “perpetual child” by the severely oppressive form of American slavery, and thus unable to rebel. Rarely can I think of a colder, nastier set of claims than these about the lack of courage or “manhood” of the African-American slaves.

So, did African-American slaves rebel? Of course they did. As early as 1934, our old friend Joel A. Rogers identified 33 slave revolts, including Nat Turner’s, in his 100 Amazing Facts. And nine years later, the historian Herbert Aptheker published his pioneering study, American Negro Slave Revolts, to set the record straight. Aptheker defined a slave revolt as an action involving 10 or more slaves, with “freedom as the apparent aim [and] contemporary references labeling the event as an uprising, plot, insurrection, or the equivalent of these.” In all, Aptheker says, he “has found records of approximately two hundred and fifty revolts and conspiracies in the history of American Negro slavery.” Other scholars have found as many as 313.

The Five Greatest Slave Rebellions in the United States | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

Just one thing to address here. I don't know how ignorant you have to be to think a people who basically gave us all of American music except maybe classical composers and bluegrass were "stupid, brutish....children in imagination."

I do not happen to think that music is an aside, btw. I think it changes the world. American music is now at the forefront of the entire world. The oppressed people in slavery basically invented it. So, there is that. Children in imagination is just beyond ignorant.

Ask the other whites here that.

K some of the whites here are clearly racists. That's unfortunate. They have to live with their own dark hearts. I do not, and neither do you--unless you choose it. Why are you choosing it?

What exactly am I choosing?

A dark heart.

 

[katsteve2012]

The vast majority of American black slaves didn't revolt because they knew they had a good deal being owned by benevolent white people.

Back in Africa they lived in filthy grass huts and were usually starving most of the time.

But here in America the black slaves were provided a small house in which to live, given food for themselves and their families, and had a guaranteed job on the plantation where they lived for free. ....

Are you retarded? Or just pretending to be stupid?
A "job" is a place that you go to on a fulltime or part time basis for a paid wage, and you have the freedom to leave when you wish, in order to pursue a better "job"
for better compensation or benefits, because your employer does not own you.

Slaves who decided to leave their "job" were often captured, beaten or sold to another owner or even killed.


Some of you ignorant, fucking assholes here are unbelievable.

 

[katsteve2012]

It's not daylight on the west coast, and we have the strangest post of the day aleady: "The vast majority of American black slaves didn't revolt because they knew they had a good deal being owned by benevolent white people."

When I was visiting South Carolina, we toured a plantation that still had its slave quarters standing and they were still being used by descendants of freed slaves who remained there to work after the Emancipation. The owners were proud of that. I think what happened was that a lot of freed slaves didn't have anywhere else to go or the wherewithal to make a different life, and for some, yes, it was the devil you know...
And there is the class/poverty thing again--a lack of $ and opportunity leads to a perpetuation of the problem.

After Jim Crow debuted immediately after slavery, former slaves were subject to be arrested for vagrancy because they were not employed. Therefore, it continued the cycle of oppression
that was the legacy of the southern states.

In many ways, that legislation was equally as bad as slavery. Freeing someone from being enslaved and then preventing them from earning a living is not really freedom.

 

[gtopa1]

It appears that many whites here need to earn the true history of life in America.
Did African-American Slaves Rebel?
by Henry Louis Gates, Jr

One of the most pernicious allegations made against the African-American people was that our slave ancestors were either exceptionally “docile” or “content and loyal,” thus explaining their purported failure to rebel extensively. Some even compare enslaved Americans to their brothers and sisters in Brazil, Cuba, Suriname and Haiti, the last of whom defeated the most powerful army in the world, Napoleon’s army, becoming the first slaves in history to successfully strike a blow for their own freedom.

As the historian Herbert Aptheker informs us in American Negro Slave Revolts, no one put this dishonest, nakedly pro-slavery argument more baldly than the Harvard historian James Schouler in 1882, who attributed this spurious conclusion to ” ‘the innate patience, docility, and child-like simplicity of the negro’ ” who, he felt, was an ” ‘imitator and non-moralist,’ ” learning ” ‘deceit and libertinism with facility,’ ” being ” ‘easily intimidated, incapable of deep plots’ “; in short, Negroes were ” ‘a black servile race, sensuous, stupid, brutish, obedient to the whip, children in imagination.’ ”

Consider how bizarre this was: It wasn’t enough that slaves had been subjugated under a harsh and brutal regime for two and a half centuries; following the collapse of Reconstruction, this school of historians — unapologetically supportive of slavery — kicked the slaves again for not rising up more frequently to kill their oppressive masters. And lest we think that this phenomenon was relegated to 19th- and early 20th-century scholars, as late as 1959, Stanley Elkins drew a picture of the slaves as infantilized “Sambos” in his book Slavery: A Problem in American Institutional and Intellectual Life, reduced to the status of the passive, “perpetual child” by the severely oppressive form of American slavery, and thus unable to rebel. Rarely can I think of a colder, nastier set of claims than these about the lack of courage or “manhood” of the African-American slaves.

So, did African-American slaves rebel? Of course they did. As early as 1934, our old friend Joel A. Rogers identified 33 slave revolts, including Nat Turner’s, in his 100 Amazing Facts. And nine years later, the historian Herbert Aptheker published his pioneering study, American Negro Slave Revolts, to set the record straight. Aptheker defined a slave revolt as an action involving 10 or more slaves, with “freedom as the apparent aim [and] contemporary references labeling the event as an uprising, plot, insurrection, or the equivalent of these.” In all, Aptheker says, he “has found records of approximately two hundred and fifty revolts and conspiracies in the history of American Negro slavery.” Other scholars have found as many as 313.

The Five Greatest Slave Rebellions in the United States | African American History Blog | The African Americans: Many Rivers to Cross

Yeah, that's right up there with those great jungle bunny civilizations that no one's ever heard of.

You know it's amazing, the three of you - if this site didn't show how many messages you'd already made I'd think you were just trolls, which I guess you are, but beyond that, do you have even the slightest sense of decency? I get that it's anonymous and everything but how do you type those words? I just don't get it.

You'd best get used to it, John. But keep those arguments coming. They're good ones.

Huh? What "arguments"??All he's done is the old "you guys are trolls" schtick!! NOTHING THERE AT ALL.

Now if he ENGAGES in argument then at it!!

Greg

 

[toobfreak]

It appears that many whites here need to earn the true history of life in America.

Here's all the history of life in America this White needs to know:

 

[Two Thumbs]

I was unaware that people were unaware of slave revolts.

they were all short lived, however they did happen

 

[dave p]

Blacks during the days of slavery became used to having free housing and food provided for them by white people.

What legacy it still carried on today, with most black people living in rent free section 8 houses and given food stamps to feed themselves. ....

27% or so live in poverty, so how do you figure that?

They can avail themselves of work just like every other race and creed.

Or we can get the government to write the rules so we can have everything. Just like whites did.

The rules have been rewritten. Everyone is in an even playing field.

You are insane. The field is not level, it cannot be level when the rules were re written after whites had a 188 year head start. And then we have the matter of hw the so called "re written" rules not being followed. Or complaints of how the "re written" rules discriminate against whites when they don't.

You are the insane one. The laws protect everyone, there are empowerment zones, equal employment laws , equal lending laws etc. the playing field is level. Stop crying, stop teaching your children to be victims. Teach them how to be productive members of society.