It Begins… New Jersey Democrats Introduce Bill to Pay Reparations to African Americans

[pknopp]

That was the irrelevant point of the post. They are better off now, that was the relevant part. Therefore they have the right to shut the **** up,

If it were irrelevant, you would not have posted it, so I am not going to shut the **** up until you address why you posted it.

Does freedom mean that little to you?

The framing of you question is quite disingenuous. Try this.
“If you were living a painful, miserable life, surrounded by rape, murder, death and disease would you surrender your freedom in exchange for a different course of life?”

That was hardly their situation.

Enlighten us...since you were there and all, I’m certain your account is far more plausible.

I don't have to prove anything. It was your claim, it would be up to you to defend the claim.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Our resident racist doesn't have it exactly right.

"Leaders of the state’s Legislative Black Caucus introduced a bill that would establish the New Jersey Reparations Task Force.

It would review the history of slavery in the state, and any racial discrimination or disparity from it."

Maybe white Americans would be more comfortable NOT knowing or admitting the endemic racism that existed in this country from 1865 to the present. Sorta seems that way

Make note. I am not in favor of reparations. Sending out checks is expensive,ineffective, and clumsy as all hell.

But knowledge of what occurred..has value

It's a complete and utter waste of time

 

[Norman]

That was the irrelevant point of the post. They are better off now, that was the relevant part. Therefore they have the right to shut the **** up,

If it were irrelevant, you would not have posted it, so I am not going to shut the **** up until you address why you posted it.

Does freedom mean that little to you?

The framing of you question is quite disingenuous. Try this.
“If you were living a painful, miserable life, surrounded by rape, murder, death and disease would you surrender your freedom in exchange for a different course of life?”

That was hardly their situation.

Enlighten us...since you were there and all, I’m certain your account is far more plausible.

I don't have to prove anything. It was your claim, it would be up to you to defend the claim.

Well... Africa isn't too much fun even today even if it is the Democratic vision. Imagine 200+ years ago.

 

[pknopp]

If it were irrelevant, you would not have posted it, so I am not going to shut the **** up until you address why you posted it.

Does freedom mean that little to you?

The framing of you question is quite disingenuous. Try this.
“If you were living a painful, miserable life, surrounded by rape, murder, death and disease would you surrender your freedom in exchange for a different course of life?”

That was hardly their situation.

Enlighten us...since you were there and all, I’m certain your account is far more plausible.

I don't have to prove anything. It was your claim, it would be up to you to defend the claim.

Well... Africa isn't too much fun even today even if it is the Democratic vision. Imagine 200+ years ago.

Many places were not so fun. 150 years ago women in the west without a husband had to turn to prostitution. Life was short and ugly for them.

 

[daveman]

And yet even you do not have your head far up enough in the ass to not admit that the Africans are far better off in America today. Especially when it comes to freedom.

Yes, they are for the most part.

But it ignores the damage that taking tens of millions of people by force out of Africa had on the content. Do you think that is in the early 1800s some country came in and took tens of millions off of this continent that it would have had a negative impact on our future?

Would a little historical accuracy be too much to ask?

Black History: Less Than 10 Percent Of Slaves Actually Came To North America, Transatlantic Slave Trade — Where Did They All Go?

To help you understand better about the Transatlantic Slave Trade and the diaspora of Africans to unknown parts of the world, these black families were often taken from Angolan regions — West Africa — and separated during Middle Passage. Having been sold into slavery by other Africans, history states that the majority of these who were on the journey were taken to South America and the West Indies.

Over the course of three centuries, African slaves in South America amassed over 90 percent of those taken from their homelands. To put that in a numerical perspective, it’s recorded that approximately 10.5 out of the recorded 12.5 million taken actually made it across the Atlantic Ocean without dying.

As is reported by the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, six percent of these black slaves were taken to North America. Only six percent.
​

Speaking of historical accuracy, let's look at how the slaves got to be slaves.

It's Time to Face the Whole Truth About the Atlantic Slave Trade

However, confronting the history of the Atlantic slave trade requires more than a sentence acknowledging that the Amistad prisoners “had been captured in Africa by Africans who sold them to European slave traders.” Website readers must understand that this terrible traffic in millions of human beings had been, as affirmed by the PBS Africans in America series, a joint venture: “During this era, Africans and Europeans stood together as equals, companions in commerce and profit. Kings exchanged respectful letters across color lines and addressed each other as colleagues. Natives of the two continents were tied into a common economy.”2

Incomplete depictions of the Atlantic slave trade are, in fact, quite common. My 2003 study of 49 state U.S. history standards revealed that not one of these guides to classroom content even mentioned the key role of Africans in supplying the Atlantic slave trade.3 In Africa itself, however, the slave trade is remembered quite differently. Nigerians, for example, explicitly teach about their own role in the trade:

Where did the supply of slaves come from? First, the Portuguese themselves kidnapped some Africans. But the bulk of the supply came from the Nigerians. These Nigerian middlemen moved to the interior where they captured other Nigerians who belonged to other communities. The middlemen also purchased many of the slaves from the people in the interior . . . . Many Nigerian middlemen began to depend totally on the slave trade and neglected every other business and occupation. The result was that when the trade was abolished [by England in 1807] these Nigerians began to protest. As years went by and the trade collapsed such Nigerians lost their sources of income and became impoverished. 4

-----

Several television productions of the last decade have acknowledged these facts: Africans in America (PBS, 1998), Wonders of the African World (PBS, 1999), and The African Trade (History Channel International, 2000). The latter begins with the visit by a group of African-Americans to the infamous slave castle and Door of No Return on Goree Island off the coast of Senegal. “Appalled by the cruelties of the Europeans,” the narrator relates, “the visitors become curious as to how Africans fell into their hands.” Their African guide admits that “this history is difficult to tell and hard to believe” but pulls no punches about African complicity in kidnapping and selling millions of African people: “All the tribes were involved in the slave trade—no exemptions.” The African-Americans were staggered: “So we really can’t blame the Europeans,” one declares, “We sold our own. It takes two.” Another visitor declares, “That’s right—money and greed.” The program concludes that “white guilt can never be erased”—but cautions that it is also important to remember that “black participation lets no one off the hook.”

The historical record is incontrovertible—as documented in the PBS Africans in America series companion book:

The white man did not introduce slavery to Africa . . . . And by the fifteenth century, men with dark skin had become quite comfortable with the concept of man as property . . . . Long before the arrival of Europeans on West Africa’s coast, the two continents shared a common acceptance of slavery as an unavoidable and necessary—perhaps even desirable—fact of existence. The commerce between the two continents, as tragic as it would become, developed upon familiar territory. Slavery was not a twisted European manipulation, although Europe capitalized on a mutual understanding and greedily expanded the slave trade into what would become a horrific enterprise . . . . It was a thunder that had no sound. Tribe stalked tribe, and eventually more than 20 million Africans would be kidnapped in their own homeland. 10

Historians estimate that ten million of these abducted Africans “never even made it to the slave ships. Most died on the march to the sea”—still chained, yoked, and shackled by their African captors—before they ever laid eyes on a white slave trader. 11 The survivors were either purchased by European slave dealers or “instantly beheaded” by the African traders “in sight of the [slave ship] captain” if they could not be sold.12 Of course, the even more horrific and inhuman middle passage—the voyage of a European (and later American) slave ship from Africa to the Western Hemisphere—still lay before those who had survived the forced trek to the coast.​

But y'all feel free to ignore history, because ****** Gotta Pay.

 

[Norman]

The framing of you question is quite disingenuous. Try this.
“If you were living a painful, miserable life, surrounded by rape, murder, death and disease would you surrender your freedom in exchange for a different course of life?”

That was hardly their situation.

Enlighten us...since you were there and all, I’m certain your account is far more plausible.

I don't have to prove anything. It was your claim, it would be up to you to defend the claim.

Well... Africa isn't too much fun even today even if it is the Democratic vision. Imagine 200+ years ago.

Many places were not so fun. 150 years ago women in the west without a husband had to turn to prostitution. Life was short and ugly for them.

Oh, muh wahman had it so bad... Way to inject more toxic left wing talking points to the discussion, as if one wasn't enough.

In any case, it does not matter. The fact is the descendants of the slaves were overwhelming beneficiaries of slavery. They have no argument, only gamma whinery of Gator.

 

[Norman]

And yet even you do not have your head far up enough in the ass to not admit that the Africans are far better off in America today. Especially when it comes to freedom.

Yes, they are for the most part.

But it ignores the damage that taking tens of millions of people by force out of Africa had on the content. Do you think that is in the early 1800s some country came in and took tens of millions off of this continent that it would have had a negative impact on our future?

Would a little historical accuracy be too much to ask?

Black History: Less Than 10 Percent Of Slaves Actually Came To North America, Transatlantic Slave Trade — Where Did They All Go?

To help you understand better about the Transatlantic Slave Trade and the diaspora of Africans to unknown parts of the world, these black families were often taken from Angolan regions — West Africa — and separated during Middle Passage. Having been sold into slavery by other Africans, history states that the majority of these who were on the journey were taken to South America and the West Indies.

Over the course of three centuries, African slaves in South America amassed over 90 percent of those taken from their homelands. To put that in a numerical perspective, it’s recorded that approximately 10.5 out of the recorded 12.5 million taken actually made it across the Atlantic Ocean without dying.

As is reported by the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, six percent of these black slaves were taken to North America. Only six percent.
​

Speaking of historical accuracy, let's look at how the slaves got to be slaves.

It's Time to Face the Whole Truth About the Atlantic Slave Trade

However, confronting the history of the Atlantic slave trade requires more than a sentence acknowledging that the Amistad prisoners “had been captured in Africa by Africans who sold them to European slave traders.” Website readers must understand that this terrible traffic in millions of human beings had been, as affirmed by the PBS Africans in America series, a joint venture: “During this era, Africans and Europeans stood together as equals, companions in commerce and profit. Kings exchanged respectful letters across color lines and addressed each other as colleagues. Natives of the two continents were tied into a common economy.”2

Incomplete depictions of the Atlantic slave trade are, in fact, quite common. My 2003 study of 49 state U.S. history standards revealed that not one of these guides to classroom content even mentioned the key role of Africans in supplying the Atlantic slave trade.3 In Africa itself, however, the slave trade is remembered quite differently. Nigerians, for example, explicitly teach about their own role in the trade:

Where did the supply of slaves come from? First, the Portuguese themselves kidnapped some Africans. But the bulk of the supply came from the Nigerians. These Nigerian middlemen moved to the interior where they captured other Nigerians who belonged to other communities. The middlemen also purchased many of the slaves from the people in the interior . . . . Many Nigerian middlemen began to depend totally on the slave trade and neglected every other business and occupation. The result was that when the trade was abolished [by England in 1807] these Nigerians began to protest. As years went by and the trade collapsed such Nigerians lost their sources of income and became impoverished. 4

-----

Several television productions of the last decade have acknowledged these facts: Africans in America (PBS, 1998), Wonders of the African World (PBS, 1999), and The African Trade (History Channel International, 2000). The latter begins with the visit by a group of African-Americans to the infamous slave castle and Door of No Return on Goree Island off the coast of Senegal. “Appalled by the cruelties of the Europeans,” the narrator relates, “the visitors become curious as to how Africans fell into their hands.” Their African guide admits that “this history is difficult to tell and hard to believe” but pulls no punches about African complicity in kidnapping and selling millions of African people: “All the tribes were involved in the slave trade—no exemptions.” The African-Americans were staggered: “So we really can’t blame the Europeans,” one declares, “We sold our own. It takes two.” Another visitor declares, “That’s right—money and greed.” The program concludes that “white guilt can never be erased”—but cautions that it is also important to remember that “black participation lets no one off the hook.”

The historical record is incontrovertible—as documented in the PBS Africans in America series companion book:

The white man did not introduce slavery to Africa . . . . And by the fifteenth century, men with dark skin had become quite comfortable with the concept of man as property . . . . Long before the arrival of Europeans on West Africa’s coast, the two continents shared a common acceptance of slavery as an unavoidable and necessary—perhaps even desirable—fact of existence. The commerce between the two continents, as tragic as it would become, developed upon familiar territory. Slavery was not a twisted European manipulation, although Europe capitalized on a mutual understanding and greedily expanded the slave trade into what would become a horrific enterprise . . . . It was a thunder that had no sound. Tribe stalked tribe, and eventually more than 20 million Africans would be kidnapped in their own homeland. 10

Historians estimate that ten million of these abducted Africans “never even made it to the slave ships. Most died on the march to the sea”—still chained, yoked, and shackled by their African captors—before they ever laid eyes on a white slave trader. 11 The survivors were either purchased by European slave dealers or “instantly beheaded” by the African traders “in sight of the [slave ship] captain” if they could not be sold.12 Of course, the even more horrific and inhuman middle passage—the voyage of a European (and later American) slave ship from Africa to the Western Hemisphere—still lay before those who had survived the forced trek to the coast.​

But y'all feel free to ignore history, because ****** Gotta Pay.

Classic gator, being 100% wrong while attempting to roast those who are correct with the usual low status male houlier than thou attitude, bragging about his superior knowledge.

He had no point to begin with, just came in to took a shit at others.

Defines the word gamma male.

 

[pknopp]

That was hardly their situation.

Enlighten us...since you were there and all, I’m certain your account is far more plausible.

I don't have to prove anything. It was your claim, it would be up to you to defend the claim.

Well... Africa isn't too much fun even today even if it is the Democratic vision. Imagine 200+ years ago.

Many places were not so fun. 150 years ago women in the west without a husband had to turn to prostitution. Life was short and ugly for them.

Oh, muh wahman had it so bad... Way to inject more toxic left wing talking points to the discussion, as if one wasn't enough.

In any case, it does not matter. The fact is the descendants of the slaves were overwhelming beneficiaries of slavery. They have no argument, only gamma whinery of Gator.

You don't get to determine what is a better life for others.

 

[jknowgood]

Our resident racist doesn't have it exactly right.

"Leaders of the state’s Legislative Black Caucus introduced a bill that would establish the New Jersey Reparations Task Force.

It would review the history of slavery in the state, and any racial discrimination or disparity from it."

Maybe white Americans would be more comfortable NOT knowing or admitting the endemic racism that existed in this country from 1865 to the present. Sorta seems that way

Make note. I am not in favor of reparations. Sending out checks is expensive,ineffective, and clumsy as all hell.

But knowledge of what occurred..has value

Liberals are doing a fine job keeping racism a live and well.

 

[Norman]

Enlighten us...since you were there and all, I’m certain your account is far more plausible.

I don't have to prove anything. It was your claim, it would be up to you to defend the claim.

Well... Africa isn't too much fun even today even if it is the Democratic vision. Imagine 200+ years ago.

Many places were not so fun. 150 years ago women in the west without a husband had to turn to prostitution. Life was short and ugly for them.

Oh, muh wahman had it so bad... Way to inject more toxic left wing talking points to the discussion, as if one wasn't enough.

In any case, it does not matter. The fact is the descendants of the slaves were overwhelming beneficiaries of slavery. They have no argument, only gamma whinery of Gator.

You don't get to determine what is a better life for others.

I don't but apparently the leftists do, when they claim I have massively hurt them 200 years ago, when I wasn't even born.

You be a good self-hater and go pay the white-tax. It's better for you.

 

[daveman]

Enlighten us...since you were there and all, I’m certain your account is far more plausible.

I don't have to prove anything. It was your claim, it would be up to you to defend the claim.

Well... Africa isn't too much fun even today even if it is the Democratic vision. Imagine 200+ years ago.

Many places were not so fun. 150 years ago women in the west without a husband had to turn to prostitution. Life was short and ugly for them.

Oh, muh wahman had it so bad... Way to inject more toxic left wing talking points to the discussion, as if one wasn't enough.

In any case, it does not matter. The fact is the descendants of the slaves were overwhelming beneficiaries of slavery. They have no argument, only gamma whinery of Gator.

You don't get to determine what is a better life for others.

But it's okay when leftists do it?

 

[pknopp]

I don't have to prove anything. It was your claim, it would be up to you to defend the claim.

Well... Africa isn't too much fun even today even if it is the Democratic vision. Imagine 200+ years ago.

Many places were not so fun. 150 years ago women in the west without a husband had to turn to prostitution. Life was short and ugly for them.

Oh, muh wahman had it so bad... Way to inject more toxic left wing talking points to the discussion, as if one wasn't enough.

In any case, it does not matter. The fact is the descendants of the slaves were overwhelming beneficiaries of slavery. They have no argument, only gamma whinery of Gator.

You don't get to determine what is a better life for others.

I don't but apparently the leftists do, when they claim I have massively hurt them 200 years ago, when I wasn't even born.

You be a good self-hater and go pay the white-tax. It's better for you.

I don't support making people pay for the sins of their fathers......

 

[pknopp]

I don't have to prove anything. It was your claim, it would be up to you to defend the claim.

Well... Africa isn't too much fun even today even if it is the Democratic vision. Imagine 200+ years ago.

Many places were not so fun. 150 years ago women in the west without a husband had to turn to prostitution. Life was short and ugly for them.

Oh, muh wahman had it so bad... Way to inject more toxic left wing talking points to the discussion, as if one wasn't enough.

In any case, it does not matter. The fact is the descendants of the slaves were overwhelming beneficiaries of slavery. They have no argument, only gamma whinery of Gator.

You don't get to determine what is a better life for others.

But it's okay when leftists do it?

You'll have to be more specific.

 

[Norman]

Well... Africa isn't too much fun even today even if it is the Democratic vision. Imagine 200+ years ago.

Many places were not so fun. 150 years ago women in the west without a husband had to turn to prostitution. Life was short and ugly for them.

Oh, muh wahman had it so bad... Way to inject more toxic left wing talking points to the discussion, as if one wasn't enough.

In any case, it does not matter. The fact is the descendants of the slaves were overwhelming beneficiaries of slavery. They have no argument, only gamma whinery of Gator.

You don't get to determine what is a better life for others.

But it's okay when leftists do it?

You'll have to be more specific.

Hello, reparations ring a bell? The topic of the discussion.

Leftists determining how much worse off the blacks are because of slavery and taxing the white people - whether they had anything to do with it - accordingly.

 

[pknopp]

Many places were not so fun. 150 years ago women in the west without a husband had to turn to prostitution. Life was short and ugly for them.

Oh, muh wahman had it so bad... Way to inject more toxic left wing talking points to the discussion, as if one wasn't enough.

In any case, it does not matter. The fact is the descendants of the slaves were overwhelming beneficiaries of slavery. They have no argument, only gamma whinery of Gator.

You don't get to determine what is a better life for others.

But it's okay when leftists do it?

You'll have to be more specific.

Hello, reparations ring a bell? The topic of the discussion.

Leftists determining how much worse off the blacks are because of slavery and taxing the white people - whether they had anything to do with it - accordingly.

I see the argument that they should be happy for becoming slaves. I find that a disgusting argument.

 

[daveman]

Well... Africa isn't too much fun even today even if it is the Democratic vision. Imagine 200+ years ago.

Many places were not so fun. 150 years ago women in the west without a husband had to turn to prostitution. Life was short and ugly for them.

Oh, muh wahman had it so bad... Way to inject more toxic left wing talking points to the discussion, as if one wasn't enough.

In any case, it does not matter. The fact is the descendants of the slaves were overwhelming beneficiaries of slavery. They have no argument, only gamma whinery of Gator.

You don't get to determine what is a better life for others.

But it's okay when leftists do it?

You'll have to be more specific.

Determining what is a better life for others. You know:

You don't need plastic straws. You're better off without them.

You don't need incandescent light bulbs. You're better off without them.

You don't need lower taxes. You're better off without them.

You don't need AR-15s. You're better off without them.

You don't need Down's babies. You're better off aborting them.

You don't need free speech. You're better off without it.

You don't need immigration laws. You're better off without them.

You don't need low-mileage vehicles. You're better off without them.

You don't need non-Democrats in office. You're better off without them.

You don't need capitalism. You're better off without it.

You don't need non-leftist-approved opinions. You're better off without them.

You don't need freedom. You're better off without it.

 

[pknopp]

Many places were not so fun. 150 years ago women in the west without a husband had to turn to prostitution. Life was short and ugly for them.

Oh, muh wahman had it so bad... Way to inject more toxic left wing talking points to the discussion, as if one wasn't enough.

In any case, it does not matter. The fact is the descendants of the slaves were overwhelming beneficiaries of slavery. They have no argument, only gamma whinery of Gator.

You don't get to determine what is a better life for others.

But it's okay when leftists do it?

You'll have to be more specific.

Determining what is a better life for others. You know:

You don't need plastic straws. You're better off without them.

You don't need incandescent light bulbs. You're better off without them.

You don't need lower taxes. You're better off without them.

You don't need AR-15s. You're better off without them.

You don't need Down's babies. You're better off aborting them.

You don't need free speech. You're better off without it.

You don't need immigration laws. You're better off without them.

You don't need low-mileage vehicles. You're better off without them.

You don't need non-Democrats in office. You're better off without them.

You don't need capitalism. You're better off without it.

You don't need non-leftist-approved opinions. You're better off without them.

You don't need freedom. You're better off without it.

No idea how any of that applies to what I said.

 

[Lesh]

Our resident racist doesn't have it exactly right.

"Leaders of the state’s Legislative Black Caucus introduced a bill that would establish the New Jersey Reparations Task Force.

It would review the history of slavery in the state, and any racial discrimination or disparity from it."

Maybe white Americans would be more comfortable NOT knowing or admitting the endemic racism that existed in this country from 1865 to the present. Sorta seems that way

Make note. I am not in favor of reparations. Sending out checks is expensive,ineffective, and clumsy as all hell.

But knowledge of what occurred..has value

Like you prefer not knowing how much white tax dollars has been spent on blacks.

Like you prefer not acknowledging the crime statistics.

Like you prefer not to acknowledge the races for which affirmative action applies.

The costs only go one way, the benefits the other. That's the fact. Of course, demographics will triumph over any fact, which is why we need to immediately secure the border.

No. Not "like" those fallacies at all

 

[Norman]

Our resident racist doesn't have it exactly right.

"Leaders of the state’s Legislative Black Caucus introduced a bill that would establish the New Jersey Reparations Task Force.

It would review the history of slavery in the state, and any racial discrimination or disparity from it."

Maybe white Americans would be more comfortable NOT knowing or admitting the endemic racism that existed in this country from 1865 to the present. Sorta seems that way

Make note. I am not in favor of reparations. Sending out checks is expensive,ineffective, and clumsy as all hell.

But knowledge of what occurred..has value

Like you prefer not knowing how much white tax dollars has been spent on blacks.

Like you prefer not acknowledging the crime statistics.

Like you prefer not to acknowledge the races for which affirmative action applies.

The costs only go one way, the benefits the other. That's the fact. Of course, demographics will triumph over any fact, which is why we need to immediately secure the border.

No. Not "like" those fallacies at all

They are not fallacies, they are facts. You can look them up any time.

 

[daveman]

Oh, muh wahman had it so bad... Way to inject more toxic left wing talking points to the discussion, as if one wasn't enough.

In any case, it does not matter. The fact is the descendants of the slaves were overwhelming beneficiaries of slavery. They have no argument, only gamma whinery of Gator.

You don't get to determine what is a better life for others.

But it's okay when leftists do it?

You'll have to be more specific.

Determining what is a better life for others. You know:

You don't need plastic straws. You're better off without them.

You don't need incandescent light bulbs. You're better off without them.

You don't need lower taxes. You're better off without them.

You don't need AR-15s. You're better off without them.

You don't need Down's babies. You're better off aborting them.

You don't need free speech. You're better off without it.

You don't need immigration laws. You're better off without them.

You don't need low-mileage vehicles. You're better off without them.

You don't need non-Democrats in office. You're better off without them.

You don't need capitalism. You're better off without it.

You don't need non-leftist-approved opinions. You're better off without them.

You don't need freedom. You're better off without it.

No idea how any of that applies to what I said.

All those are leftist ideas of determining what's a better life for others.

But you said Norman doesn't get to do that.

So why is it okay for leftists to determine what's a better life for others, but not Norman?