The truths about slavery in America the democrats and the left won’t like

[2aguy]

Great article on slavery in the United States that dismantles the talking points of America hating democrats…….

One of many points….

BLACK SLAVES BULT AMERICA.”

This is another lie of the Left.

Those who make this argument point to the lucrative cotton manufacturing and trade in the 19th-century — the industry in which black slaves were primarily used in the American South.

But University of Illinois professor of Economics, Deirdre McCloskey, answered this:

“Growing cotton, unlike sugar or rice, never required slavery. By 1870, freedmen and whites produced as much cotton as the South produced in the slave time of 1860. Cotton was not a slave crop in India or in southwest China, where it was grown in bulk… That slaves produced cotton does not imply that they were essential or causal in the production…

“The United States and the United Kingdom and the rest would have become just as rich without the 250 years of unrequited toil. They have remained rich, observe, even after the peculiar institution was abolished, because their riches did not depend on its sinfulness.”
But one need not know anything about cotton to understand how false “Black slaves built America” is. All you need is common sense.

First, even if slavery accounted for much of the wealth of the South, the Civil War that brought slavery to an end in the United States wiped out nearly all of that wealth and cost the Union billions (in today’s dollars).

Second, if slavery built the American economy, the most robust economy in world history, why didn’t Brazil become an economic superpower? Brazil imported four million black slaves, about 12 times as many as America. Why did the slave-owning American South lag so far behind the North economically? Why did England, which, though it played a major role in the transatlantic slave trade until the beginning of the 19th century, had almost no slaves, become the most advanced economy of the 19th century?

“Black slaves built America” is left-wing propaganda to vilify America and to discredit capitalism.

“America is systemically racist.”

This is the Great Left Lie.

https://hotair.com/dennis-prager/2023/04/18/slavery-the-left-and-truth-n544580

 

[JoeB131]

Wow, here's the funny thing, 2TinyGuy

Slavery really didn't end in 1865. It was simply replaced by a new form called "Debt Peonage", where black people were arrested for minor crimes, forced to work in those industries to pay off their debts, and the debt kept accumulating because they were charged for food and board in excess of what they earned.

Debt Peonage didn't end in this country until 1942, when it was outlawed by Congress because it was a bad look going into World War II.

Second, if slavery built the American economy, the most robust economy in world history, why didn’t Brazil become an economic superpower? Brazil imported four million black slaves, about 12 times as many as America. Why did the slave-owning American South lag so far behind the North economically? Why did England, which, though it played a major role in the transatlantic slave trade until the beginning of the 19th century, had almost no slaves, become the most advanced economy of the 19th century?

Here's a better question. Why does anyone take Dennis Prager seriously?

Brazil did advance for a time, but the corruption in their system was a large part of the problem. They abolished slavery, and then overthrew the Emperor who abolished it.

As for "England" (Actually, the United Kingdom, but never mind, Prager, we know you're a moron) England advanced because it conquered a bunch of countries and looted them for their resources, particularly India. When the US Civil War crippled American cotton production, the British set up Cotton production in their colonies India and Egypt. in fact, the reason why the spinning wheel is part of India's flag is it because an anti-British symbol.

Churchill hated Gandhi more than he hated Hitler.

 

[pknopp]

Slavery was a horrible practice. Period, end of story.

 

[Coyote]

Great article on slavery in the United States that dismantles the talking points of America hating democrats…….

One of many points….

BLACK SLAVES BULT AMERICA.”

This is another lie of the Left.

White-washing slavery…rightists have gone from “slavery wasn’t that bad” to “slavery didn’t contribute much” to our country.

Those who make this argument point to the lucrative cotton manufacturing and trade in the 19th-century — the industry in which black slaves were primarily used in the American South.

But University of Illinois professor of Economics, Deirdre McCloskey, answered this:

“Growing cotton, unlike sugar or rice, never required slavery. By 1870, freedmen and whites produced as much cotton as the South produced in the slave time of 1860. Cotton was not a slave crop in India or in southwest China, where it was grown in bulk… That slaves produced cotton does not imply that they were essential or causal in the production…

She leaves out something. “Freedmen” were former slaves now sharecroppers. Approximately 1/3 of share croppers where black. Sharecropping kept people poor through a system of debt and bondage not unlike serfs. Cotton, like tobacco, was labor intensive and what is cheap than slave labor? If they weren’t essential, why have them?

“The United States and the United Kingdom and the rest would have become just as rich without the 250 years of unrequited toil. They have remained rich, observe, even after the peculiar institution was abolished, because their riches did not depend on its sinfulness.”
But one need not know anything about cotton to understand how false “Black slaves built America” is. All you need is common sense.

“Common sense” fallacy. Slavery opened the door to developing the south. Prior to large scale slavery much of the Deep South was undeveloped and endemic diseases killed such as malria, yellow fever etc. killed off colonists at a high rate. Black slaves withstood the heat better, were more resistant to some tropical diseases, couldn’t run away as easily as Indians, and were expendable.

First, even if slavery accounted for much of the wealth of the South, the Civil War that brought slavery to an end in the United States wiped out nearly all of that wealth and cost the Union billions (in today’s dollars).

What is the point here?

Second, if slavery built the American economy, the most robust economy in world history, why didn’t Brazil become an economic superpower? Brazil imported four million black slaves, about 12 times as many as America.

Brazil is a completely different country with different problems, climate,etc.

Why did the slave-owning American South lag so far behind the North economically? Why did England, which, though it played a major role in the transatlantic slave trade until the beginning of the 19th century, had almost no slaves, become the most advanced economy of the 19th century?

Again, comparing apples and oranges. The south was primarily agricultural and the north industrial. The profit comes with value added products, not the raw material.

“Black slaves built America” is left-wing propaganda to vilify America and to discredit capitalism.

“America is systemically racist.”

This is the Great Left Lie.

https://hotair.com/dennis-prager/2023/04/18/slavery-the-left-and-truth-n544580

 

[22lcidw]

White-washing slavery…rightists have gone from “slavery wasn’t that bad” to “slavery didn’t contribute much” to our country.





She leaves out something. “Freedmen” were former slaves now sharecroppers. Approximately 1/3 of share croppers where black. Sharecropping kept people poor through a system of debt and bondage not unlike serfs. Cotton, like tobacco, was labor intensive and what is cheap than slave labor? If they weren’t essential, why have them?





“Common sense” fallacy. Slavery opened the door to developing the south. Prior to large scale slavery much of the Deep South was undeveloped and endemic diseases killed such as malria, yellow fever etc. killed off colonists at a high rate. Black slaves withstood the heat better, were more resistant to some tropical diseases, couldn’t run away as easily as Indians, and were expendable.







What is the point here?


Brazil is a completely different country with different problems, climate,etc.





Again, comparing apples and oranges. The south was primarily agricultural and the north industrial. The profit comes with value added products, not the raw material.

When the Euros came her, it started with the English. Only the English had two ways of some semblance of rights for the peasants. The Magna Carta and The Rule of Law. Very basic. No other nation that formed in the Western Hemisphere and advanced had this start. Canada stayed under English loyalty. We mock the constitution today due to its flaw or flaws. Documents professing rights are hard to get. There are people who have done a run around on that document over many many decades. We do not even pay attention to some of the amendments when it is inconvenient for the agendas. If a new world government document shows up, I guarantee you those rights will be abused as needed and we will accept it if we even know about it.

 

[Lord Long Rod]

White-washing slavery…rightists have gone from “slavery wasn’t that bad” to “slavery didn’t contribute much” to our country.





She leaves out something. “Freedmen” were former slaves now sharecroppers. Approximately 1/3 of share croppers where black. Sharecropping kept people poor through a system of debt and bondage not unlike serfs. Cotton, like tobacco, was labor intensive and what is cheap than slave labor? If they weren’t essential, why have them?





“Common sense” fallacy. Slavery opened the door to developing the south. Prior to large scale slavery much of the Deep South was undeveloped and endemic diseases killed such as malria, yellow fever etc. killed off colonists at a high rate. Black slaves withstood the heat better, were more resistant to some tropical diseases, couldn’t run away as easily as Indians, and were expendable.







What is the point here?


Brazil is a completely different country with different problems, climate,etc.





Again, comparing apples and oranges. The south was primarily agricultural and the north industrial. The profit comes with value added products, not the raw material.

The whole "slavery is bad" thing is something that came about only very recently in terms of human history. Second, if not for the white western man and his Judeo-Christian morality, slavery may still exist in the western world today. In other words, it was WHITE POWER that set blacks free from the chains of slavery.

 

[Lord Long Rod]

Slavery was a horrible practice. Period, end of story.

Thank God for the white man for ending slavery in the western world.

 

[2aguy]

White-washing slavery…rightists have gone from “slavery wasn’t that bad” to “slavery didn’t contribute much” to our country.





She leaves out something. “Freedmen” were former slaves now sharecroppers. Approximately 1/3 of share croppers where black. Sharecropping kept people poor through a system of debt and bondage not unlike serfs. Cotton, like tobacco, was labor intensive and what is cheap than slave labor? If they weren’t essential, why have them?





“Common sense” fallacy. Slavery opened the door to developing the south. Prior to large scale slavery much of the Deep South was undeveloped and endemic diseases killed such as malria, yellow fever etc. killed off colonists at a high rate. Black slaves withstood the heat better, were more resistant to some tropical diseases, couldn’t run away as easily as Indians, and were expendable.







What is the point here?


Brazil is a completely different country with different problems, climate,etc.





Again, comparing apples and oranges. The south was primarily agricultural and the north industrial. The profit comes with value added products, not the raw material.

And every single bad thing you mentioned.....was championed by the democrat party........

From the link...

Growing cotton, unlike sugar or rice, never required slavery. By 1870, freedmen and whites produced as much cotton as the South produced in the slave time of 1860. Cotton was not a slave crop in India or in southwest China, where it was grown in bulk… That slaves produced cotton does not imply that they were essential or causal in the production…

The democrat party has been evil since it was founded by slave owners...

 

[2aguy]

Slavery was a horrible practice. Period, end of story.

No one said it wasn't......what this is pointing out is that the left condemns America as being the worst of the worst in historical slavery, while ignoring the rest of the world, and the actual efforts of the United States to end slavery in our country...at great cost......

And.....the left is trying to hide the democrat party and its connection to slavery and racism.......

 

[pknopp]

No one said it wasn't......what this is pointing out is that the left condemns America as being the worst of the worst in historical slavery, while ignoring the rest of the world, and the actual efforts of the United States to end slavery in our country...at great cost......

The rest of the world isn't my business.

And.....the left is trying to hide the democrat party and its connection to slavery and racism.......

I care less about political arguments.

 

[Resnic]

Great article on slavery in the United States that dismantles the talking points of America hating democrats…….

One of many points….

BLACK SLAVES BULT AMERICA.”

This is another lie of the Left.

Those who make this argument point to the lucrative cotton manufacturing and trade in the 19th-century — the industry in which black slaves were primarily used in the American South.

But University of Illinois professor of Economics, Deirdre McCloskey, answered this:

“Growing cotton, unlike sugar or rice, never required slavery. By 1870, freedmen and whites produced as much cotton as the South produced in the slave time of 1860. Cotton was not a slave crop in India or in southwest China, where it was grown in bulk… That slaves produced cotton does not imply that they were essential or causal in the production…

“The United States and the United Kingdom and the rest would have become just as rich without the 250 years of unrequited toil. They have remained rich, observe, even after the peculiar institution was abolished, because their riches did not depend on its sinfulness.”
But one need not know anything about cotton to understand how false “Black slaves built America” is. All you need is common sense.

First, even if slavery accounted for much of the wealth of the South, the Civil War that brought slavery to an end in the United States wiped out nearly all of that wealth and cost the Union billions (in today’s dollars).

Second, if slavery built the American economy, the most robust economy in world history, why didn’t Brazil become an economic superpower? Brazil imported four million black slaves, about 12 times as many as America. Why did the slave-owning American South lag so far behind the North economically? Why did England, which, though it played a major role in the transatlantic slave trade until the beginning of the 19th century, had almost no slaves, become the most advanced economy of the 19th century?

“Black slaves built America” is left-wing propaganda to vilify America and to discredit capitalism.

“America is systemically racist.”

This is the Great Left Lie.

https://hotair.com/dennis-prager/2023/04/18/slavery-the-left-and-truth-n544580

Anything by Thomas sowell on slavery is always the real truth.

 

[Coyote]

And every single bad thing you mentioned.....was championed by the democrat party........

From the link...

Growing cotton, unlike sugar or rice, never required slavery. By 1870, freedmen and whites produced as much cotton as the South produced in the slave time of 1860. Cotton was not a slave crop in India or in southwest China, where it was grown in bulk… That slaves produced cotton does not imply that they were essential or causal in the production…

The democrat party has been evil since it was founded by slave owners...

Who cares. The article is off base. Yesterdays Dems are todays Republicans. Same part of the country.

By the way…cotton might not have been a “slave crop” in China and India, both hugely populous countries (where as the U.S. was not) but it was produced by cheap labor working in slave like conditions.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Nothing factual can be said about the horrific conduct of Democrats that will not be refuted by faithful followers such as the aptly named Coyote. What a miserable excuse Coyote is for a "moderator" when his bias is so inflamed in the wrong direction.

Nota bene: To pretend that slavery no longer exists is blatantly ignorant. A National Geographic article of two or three years ago claimed that "there are more slaves today than ever before in human history." Numbers were proffered and I was interested to know the country with the most slaves today.

It is India.

 

[2aguy]

Who cares. The article is off base. Yesterdays Dems are todays Republicans. Same part of the country.

By the way…cotton might not have been a “slave crop” in China and India, both hugely populous countries (where as the U.S. was not) but it was produced by cheap labor working in slave like conditions.

That is a lie, the democrats never changed.

 

[whitehall]

Apparently democrats are reverting to their anti-Lincoln and pro slavery side by losing track of an estimated 100k illegal children who are apparently somewhere in bondage or worse.

 

[AZrailwhale]

White-washing slavery…rightists have gone from “slavery wasn’t that bad” to “slavery didn’t contribute much” to our country.





She leaves out something. “Freedmen” were former slaves now sharecroppers. Approximately 1/3 of share croppers where black. Sharecropping kept people poor through a system of debt and bondage not unlike serfs. Cotton, like tobacco, was labor intensive and what is cheap than slave labor? If they weren’t essential, why have them?





“Common sense” fallacy. Slavery opened the door to developing the south. Prior to large scale slavery much of the Deep South was undeveloped and endemic diseases killed such as malria, yellow fever etc. killed off colonists at a high rate. Black slaves withstood the heat better, were more resistant to some tropical diseases, couldn’t run away as easily as Indians, and were expendable.







What is the point here?


Brazil is a completely different country with different problems, climate,etc.





Again, comparing apples and oranges. The south was primarily agricultural and the north industrial. The profit comes with value added products, not the raw material.

The north BECAME industrial. At the beginning when slaves were imported the north was largely subsistence farming and trade. Trade of raw material and foodstuffs created the wealth that led to industrialization in the north. The south always had a raw material export-based economy growing cotton, sugar and tobacco, mostly for Great Britain.

 

[AMart]

Slavery still exists in many countries let me know when you faggot leftists do anything about it.

 

[Coyote]

The north BECAME industrial. At the beginning when slaves were imported the north was largely subsistence farming and trade. Trade of raw material and foodstuffs created the wealth that led to industrialization in the north. The south always had a raw material export-based economy growing cotton, sugar and tobacco, mostly for Great Britain.

Exactly. All labor intensive crops in a region where endemic diseases kept it fron much industrial development.v Allso the colonists who settled those areas brought with them a different culture and expectations then the further north.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Exactly. All labor intensive crops in a region where endemic diseases kept it fron much industrial development.v Allso the colonists who settled those areas brought with them a different culture and expectations then the further north.

He doesn't know the difference between "then" and "than" and still wants to lecture US? The hubris, the arrogance of Leftists.

 

[dudmuck]

Slavery still exists in many countries let me know when you faggot leftists do anything about it.