The Reality that Racists Who Are White Refuse to Face

[IM2]

You aren't owed a fucking thing. You didn't suffer, and blacks didn't build the country.

The Irish and the Chinese who built the railroads are responsible for the wealth of this country.

You people held back economic development which is why the South lost the war.

Blacks did build this country. In more ways than one. America became wealthy due to the textile industry. The textile indutry needed cotton for that to happen.

Then we have this:

“By a conservative estimate, in 1860 the total value of American slaves was $4 billion, far more than the gold and silver then circulating nationally ($228.3 million, “most of it in the North,” the authors add), total currency ($435.4 million), and even the value of the South’s total farmland ($1.92 billion). Slaves were, to slavers, worth more than everything else they could imagine combined.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry
​

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry, Chicago, Lawrence Hill Books, 2016,

In today’s money slaves in 1860 were worth over 127 billion dollars. According to the Sublettes that is a conservative estimate, meaning the amount could be even more. Slaves were worth more than the gold, silver, total U.S. currency, plus all the farmland in the South combined in 1860 yet did not receive a dime. Remember that slaves were considered property. Because they were, wealthy slaveowners looking for a way to get additional capital to buy more slaves came up with an idea: slave-backed securities. Your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Slaveowners securitized slavery. Cornell professors Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman detailed how it was done in an article published by the Chicago Sun-Times on its website dated March 7, 2014. This is from the article:

In the 1830s, powerful Southern slaveowners wanted to import capital into their states so they could buy more slaves. They came up with a new, two-part idea: mortgaging slaves;and then turning the mortgages into bonds that could be marketed all over the world.

First, American planters organized new banks, usually in new states like Mississippi and Louisiana. Drawing up lists of slaves for collateral, the planters then mortgaged them to the banks they had created, enabling themselves to buy additional slaves to expand cotton production. To provide capital for those loans, the banks sold bonds to investors from around the globe — London, New York, Amsterdam, Paris. The bond buyers, many of whom lived in countries where slavery was illegal, didn’t own individual slaves — just bonds backed by their value. Planters’ mortgage payments paid the interest and the principle on these bond payments. Enslaved human beings had been, in modern financial lingo, “securitized.”

As slave-backed mortgages became paper bonds, everybody profited — except, obviously, enslaved African Americans whose forced labor repaid owners’ mortgages. But investors owed a piece of slave-earned income. Older slave states such as Maryland and Virginia sold slaves to the new cotton states, at securitization-inflated prices, resulting in slave asset bubble. Cotton factor firms like the now-defunct Lehman Brothers — founded in Alabama — became wildly successful. Lehman moved to Wall Street, and for all these firms, every transaction in slave-earned money flowing in and out of the U.S. earned Wall Street firms a fee.

The infant American financial industry nourished itself on profits taken from financing slave traders, cotton brokers and underwriting slave-backed bonds. But though slavery ended in 1865, in the years after the Civil War, black entrepreneurs would find themselves excluded from a financial system originally built on their bodies.

Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves
​

Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves, Chicago Sun-Times.com March 7, 2014, derived from: American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves

Since 2000, U.S. gross domestic product lost much as a result of discriminatory practices in a range of areas, including education and access to business loans, according to a study by Citigroup. Specifically, the study came up with $16 trillion in lost GDP by noting four key racial gaps between African Americans and whites:

$13 trillion lost in potential business revenue because of discriminatory lending to African American entrepreneurs, with an estimated 6.1 million jobs not generated as a result

$2.7 trillion in income lost because of disparities in wages suffered by African Americans

$218 billion lost over the past two decades because of discrimination in providing housing credit

And $90 billion to $113 billion in lifetime income lost from discrimination in accessing higher education

We can state our case for reparations on these numbers that started in the year 2000. If we only take lost income from racism starting in 2000, it equals 56,250 per black person in America. And this is money owed NOW, for things done in OUR LIFETIMES.

https://ir.citi.com/NvIUklHPilz14Hwd3oxqZBLMn1_XPqo5FrxsZD0x6hhil84ZxaxEuJUWmak51UHvYk75VKeHCMI%3D

Son, the fact that you are white and have an opinion doesn't mean a motherfucking thing. I have studied this and much more. You come from a position of ignorance and given all the information avaliable on a clicks notice, your ignorance is willful. You don't know the first thing about which you speak.

What those like you need to do in these discussions is when one of us who are black present you with facts that rebut your ancient racist beliefs, take notes and read all of the information you get linked. In this case you can buy the Sublettes e-book cheap. But it's 800 pages and if you haven't read it, you can't tell me jack shit about what blacks did not do.

 

[IM2]

Recuse yourself this minute.

Nah. Just read and weep.

“By a conservative estimate, in 1860 the total value of American slaves was $4 billion, far more than the gold and silver then circulating nationally ($228.3 million, “most of it in the North,” the authors add), total currency ($435.4 million), and even the value of the South’s total farmland ($1.92 billion). Slaves were, to slavers, worth more than everything else they could imagine combined.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry
​

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry, Chicago, Lawrence Hill Books, 2016,

In today’s money slaves in 1860 were worth over 127 billion dollars. According to the Sublettes that is a conservative estimate, meaning the amount could be even more. Slaves were worth more than the gold, silver, total U.S. currency, plus all the farmland in the South combined in 1860 yet did not receive a dime. Remember that slaves were considered property. Because they were, wealthy slaveowners looking for a way to get additional capital to buy more slaves came up with an idea: slave-backed securities. Your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Slaveowners securitized slavery. Cornell professors Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman detailed how it was done in an article published by the Chicago Sun-Times on its website dated March 7, 2014. This is from the article:

In the 1830s, powerful Southern slaveowners wanted to import capital into their states so they could buy more slaves. They came up with a new, two-part idea: mortgaging slaves;and then turning the mortgages into bonds that could be marketed all over the world.

First, American planters organized new banks, usually in new states like Mississippi and Louisiana. Drawing up lists of slaves for collateral, the planters then mortgaged them to the banks they had created, enabling themselves to buy additional slaves to expand cotton production. To provide capital for those loans, the banks sold bonds to investors from around the globe — London, New York, Amsterdam, Paris. The bond buyers, many of whom lived in countries where slavery was illegal, didn’t own individual slaves — just bonds backed by their value. Planters’ mortgage payments paid the interest and the principle on these bond payments. Enslaved human beings had been, in modern financial lingo, “securitized.”

As slave-backed mortgages became paper bonds, everybody profited — except, obviously, enslaved African Americans whose forced labor repaid owners’ mortgages. But investors owed a piece of slave-earned income. Older slave states such as Maryland and Virginia sold slaves to the new cotton states, at securitization-inflated prices, resulting in slave asset bubble. Cotton factor firms like the now-defunct Lehman Brothers — founded in Alabama — became wildly successful. Lehman moved to Wall Street, and for all these firms, every transaction in slave-earned money flowing in and out of the U.S. earned Wall Street firms a fee.

The infant American financial industry nourished itself on profits taken from financing slave traders, cotton brokers and underwriting slave-backed bonds. But though slavery ended in 1865, in the years after the Civil War, black entrepreneurs would find themselves excluded from a financial system originally built on their bodies.

Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves
​

Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves, Chicago Sun-Times.com March 7, 2014, derived from: American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves

Since 2000, U.S. gross domestic product lost much as a result of discriminatory practices in a range of areas, including education and access to business loans, according to a study by Citigroup. Specifically, the study came up with $16 trillion in lost GDP by noting four key racial gaps between African Americans and whites:

$13 trillion lost in potential business revenue because of discriminatory lending to African American entrepreneurs, with an estimated 6.1 million jobs not generated as a result

$2.7 trillion in income lost because of disparities in wages suffered by African Americans

$218 billion lost over the past two decades because of discrimination in providing housing credit

And $90 billion to $113 billion in lifetime income lost from discrimination in accessing higher education

We can state our case for reparations on these numbers that started in the year 2000. If we only take lost income from racism starting in 2000, it equals 56,250 per black person in America. And this is money owed NOW, for things done in OUR LIFETIMES.

https://ir.citi.com/NvIUklHPilz14Hwd3oxqZBLMn1_XPqo5FrxsZD0x6hhil84ZxaxEuJUWmak51UHvYk75VKeHCMI%3D

Woman, the fact that you are white and have an opinion doesn't mean a motherfucking thing. I have studied this and much more. You come from a position of ignorance and given all the information avaliable on a clicks notice, your ignorance is willful. You don't know the first thing about which you speak.

What those like you need to do in these discussions is when one of us who are black present you with facts that rebut your ancient racist beliefs, take notes and read all of the information you get linked. In this case you can buy the Sublettes e-book cheap. But it's 800 pages and if you haven't read it, you can't tell me jack shit about what blacks did not do.

 

[Mac-7]

Again, gaslighting doesn't work here. The facts show I am right.

You mean your lies reassure you that you are right.

blacks simply failed to claim their share of the free land

 

[Mac-7]

Blacks did build this country. In more ways than one. America became wealthy due to the textile industry. The textile indutry needed cotton for that to happen.

Then we have this:

“By a conservative estimate, in 1860 the total value of American slaves was $4 billion, far more than the gold and silver then circulating nationally ($228.3 million, “most of it in the North,” the authors add), total currency ($435.4 million), and even the value of the South’s total farmland ($1.92 billion). Slaves were, to slavers, worth more than everything else they could imagine combined.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry
​

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry, Chicago, Lawrence Hill Books, 2016,

In today’s money slaves in 1860 were worth over 127 billion dollars. According to the Sublettes that is a conservative estimate, meaning the amount could be even more. Slaves were worth more than the gold, silver, total U.S. currency, plus all the farmland in the South combined in 1860 yet did not receive a dime. Remember that slaves were considered property. Because they were, wealthy slaveowners looking for a way to get additional capital to buy more slaves came up with an idea: slave-backed securities. Your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Slaveowners securitized slavery. Cornell professors Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman detailed how it was done in an article published by the Chicago Sun-Times on its website dated March 7, 2014. This is from the article:

In the 1830s, powerful Southern slaveowners wanted to import capital into their states so they could buy more slaves. They came up with a new, two-part idea: mortgaging slaves;and then turning the mortgages into bonds that could be marketed all over the world.

First, American planters organized new banks, usually in new states like Mississippi and Louisiana. Drawing up lists of slaves for collateral, the planters then mortgaged them to the banks they had created, enabling themselves to buy additional slaves to expand cotton production. To provide capital for those loans, the banks sold bonds to investors from around the globe — London, New York, Amsterdam, Paris. The bond buyers, many of whom lived in countries where slavery was illegal, didn’t own individual slaves — just bonds backed by their value. Planters’ mortgage payments paid the interest and the principle on these bond payments. Enslaved human beings had been, in modern financial lingo, “securitized.”

As slave-backed mortgages became paper bonds, everybody profited — except, obviously, enslaved African Americans whose forced labor repaid owners’ mortgages. But investors owed a piece of slave-earned income. Older slave states such as Maryland and Virginia sold slaves to the new cotton states, at securitization-inflated prices, resulting in slave asset bubble. Cotton factor firms like the now-defunct Lehman Brothers — founded in Alabama — became wildly successful. Lehman moved to Wall Street, and for all these firms, every transaction in slave-earned money flowing in and out of the U.S. earned Wall Street firms a fee.

The infant American financial industry nourished itself on profits taken from financing slave traders, cotton brokers and underwriting slave-backed bonds. But though slavery ended in 1865, in the years after the Civil War, black entrepreneurs would find themselves excluded from a financial system originally built on their bodies.

Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves
​

Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves, Chicago Sun-Times.com March 7, 2014, derived from: American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves

Since 2000, U.S. gross domestic product lost much as a result of discriminatory practices in a range of areas, including education and access to business loans, according to a study by Citigroup. Specifically, the study came up with $16 trillion in lost GDP by noting four key racial gaps between African Americans and whites:

$13 trillion lost in potential business revenue because of discriminatory lending to African American entrepreneurs, with an estimated 6.1 million jobs not generated as a result

$2.7 trillion in income lost because of disparities in wages suffered by African Americans

$218 billion lost over the past two decades because of discrimination in providing housing credit

And $90 billion to $113 billion in lifetime income lost from discrimination in accessing higher education

We can state our case for reparations on these numbers that started in the year 2000. If we only take lost income from racism starting in 2000, it equals 56,250 per black person in America. And this is money owed NOW, for things done in OUR LIFETIMES.

https://ir.citi.com/NvIUklHPilz14Hwd3oxqZBLMn1_XPqo5FrxsZD0x6hhil84ZxaxEuJUWmak51UHvYk75VKeHCMI%3D

Son, the fact that you are white and have an opinion doesn't mean a motherfucking thing. I have studied this and much more. You come from a position of ignorance and given all the information avaliable on a clicks notice, your ignorance is willful. You don't know the first thing about which you speak.

What those like you need to do in these discussions is when one of us who are black present you with facts that rebut your ancient racist beliefs, take notes and read all of the information you get linked. In this case you can buy the Sublettes e-book cheap. But it's 800 pages and if you haven't read it, you can't tell me jack shit about what blacks did not do.

Blacks have not always received equal treatment in America under the law

but the laws have been changed and thats all you are entitled to

 

[westwall]

Blacks did build this country. In more ways than one. America became wealthy due to the textile industry. The textile indutry needed cotton for that to happen.

Then we have this:

“By a conservative estimate, in 1860 the total value of American slaves was $4 billion, far more than the gold and silver then circulating nationally ($228.3 million, “most of it in the North,” the authors add), total currency ($435.4 million), and even the value of the South’s total farmland ($1.92 billion). Slaves were, to slavers, worth more than everything else they could imagine combined.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry
​

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry, Chicago, Lawrence Hill Books, 2016,

In today’s money slaves in 1860 were worth over 127 billion dollars. According to the Sublettes that is a conservative estimate, meaning the amount could be even more. Slaves were worth more than the gold, silver, total U.S. currency, plus all the farmland in the South combined in 1860 yet did not receive a dime. Remember that slaves were considered property. Because they were, wealthy slaveowners looking for a way to get additional capital to buy more slaves came up with an idea: slave-backed securities. Your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Slaveowners securitized slavery. Cornell professors Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman detailed how it was done in an article published by the Chicago Sun-Times on its website dated March 7, 2014. This is from the article:

In the 1830s, powerful Southern slaveowners wanted to import capital into their states so they could buy more slaves. They came up with a new, two-part idea: mortgaging slaves;and then turning the mortgages into bonds that could be marketed all over the world.

First, American planters organized new banks, usually in new states like Mississippi and Louisiana. Drawing up lists of slaves for collateral, the planters then mortgaged them to the banks they had created, enabling themselves to buy additional slaves to expand cotton production. To provide capital for those loans, the banks sold bonds to investors from around the globe — London, New York, Amsterdam, Paris. The bond buyers, many of whom lived in countries where slavery was illegal, didn’t own individual slaves — just bonds backed by their value. Planters’ mortgage payments paid the interest and the principle on these bond payments. Enslaved human beings had been, in modern financial lingo, “securitized.”

As slave-backed mortgages became paper bonds, everybody profited — except, obviously, enslaved African Americans whose forced labor repaid owners’ mortgages. But investors owed a piece of slave-earned income. Older slave states such as Maryland and Virginia sold slaves to the new cotton states, at securitization-inflated prices, resulting in slave asset bubble. Cotton factor firms like the now-defunct Lehman Brothers — founded in Alabama — became wildly successful. Lehman moved to Wall Street, and for all these firms, every transaction in slave-earned money flowing in and out of the U.S. earned Wall Street firms a fee.

The infant American financial industry nourished itself on profits taken from financing slave traders, cotton brokers and underwriting slave-backed bonds. But though slavery ended in 1865, in the years after the Civil War, black entrepreneurs would find themselves excluded from a financial system originally built on their bodies.

Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves
​

Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves, Chicago Sun-Times.com March 7, 2014, derived from: American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves

Since 2000, U.S. gross domestic product lost much as a result of discriminatory practices in a range of areas, including education and access to business loans, according to a study by Citigroup. Specifically, the study came up with $16 trillion in lost GDP by noting four key racial gaps between African Americans and whites:

$13 trillion lost in potential business revenue because of discriminatory lending to African American entrepreneurs, with an estimated 6.1 million jobs not generated as a result

$2.7 trillion in income lost because of disparities in wages suffered by African Americans

$218 billion lost over the past two decades because of discrimination in providing housing credit

And $90 billion to $113 billion in lifetime income lost from discrimination in accessing higher education

We can state our case for reparations on these numbers that started in the year 2000. If we only take lost income from racism starting in 2000, it equals 56,250 per black person in America. And this is money owed NOW, for things done in OUR LIFETIMES.

https://ir.citi.com/NvIUklHPilz14Hwd3oxqZBLMn1_XPqo5FrxsZD0x6hhil84ZxaxEuJUWmak51UHvYk75VKeHCMI%3D

Son, the fact that you are white and have an opinion doesn't mean a motherfucking thing. I have studied this and much more. You come from a position of ignorance and given all the information avaliable on a clicks notice, your ignorance is willful. You don't know the first thing about which you speak.

What those like you need to do in these discussions is when one of us who are black present you with facts that rebut your ancient racist beliefs, take notes and read all of the information you get linked. In this case you can buy the Sublettes e-book cheap. But it's 800 pages and if you haven't read it, you can't tell me jack shit about what blacks did not do.

No, you didn't. The slaves picked cotton. That's all they did.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Not if we get what we are owed. Because we aren't on the bottom now.

You’ll always be on the bottom. Even if you get reparations, most blacks will do what they did with the stimulus money or lotto winnings. Go blow it on stuff for immediate gratification, in a year they’ll be broke again and complaining again. The only way to get off the bottom is to get an education, work hard, live within your means and don’t have kids before you can afford them.

You in particular claim how successful you are, why aren’t you spending all the time you waste here telling us how horrible we and how unfair things are for you, teaching black kids how to do what you claim you have done?

if you have accomplished half of what you claim, you are not only a racist, but a hypocrite as well.

 

[Turtlesoup]

The government of this country owes us dumb ass. This is always where you stupids fail. Read this real close because slavery is not the only reason for reparations. Your ancestors left Europe and they are white. So they benefitted from being white. Read this and learn that your argument has no merit.

"Numerous white analysts have attacked the idea of white society owing such back wages for slavery; they argue that figuring out the debts of a supposedly too-distant history is just too difficult. Yet such an argument almost always fails to note that the damages done to African Americans did not end with slavery, but persisted for another one hundred years in the form of legal segregation, and then for several more decades in present-day discrimination. The era of black enslavement was not followed by a century of redress, justice, and equality, but rather just the opposite. Moreover, today, there are millions of living African Americans who suffered severely under legal segregation, and many more continue to suffer today from racial discrimination at the hands of many white Americans."

Those like you don't want to discuss the years after slavery. And I don't think you want to face a man who has had relatives lynched, spit on and beaten by whites. So I will walk up to your face and talk about reparations and we will have a discussion or you can walk away.

The government owes your lazy selfish self-serving ass nothing. They need to cut you completely off the government tit, so you can grow the fuck up and learn to take care of yourself instead of whinning that others should take care of. You sound like the average everyday crackhead.....give me money, you owe me, give me.

 

[marvin martian]

Documenting the Costs of Slavery, Segregation, and Contemporary Racism: Why Reparations Are in Order for African Americans
View attachment 516672

Joe Richard Feagin is an American sociologist and social theorist who has conducted extensive research on racial and gender issues, especially in regard to the United States. He is currently the Ella C. McFadden Distinguished Professor at Texas A&M University. Feagin has taught at the University of Massachusetts, Boston, University of California, Riverside, University of Texas at Austin, University of Florida, and Texas A&M University. Feagin has done much research work on race and ethnic relations and has served as the scholar in residence at the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. He has written over 60 books. He is the 2006 recipient of a Harvard Alumni Association achievement award and was the 1999–2000 president of the American Sociological Association.

Since the mid-1600s, now for some fifteen generations or so, the exploitation and oppression of African Americans has redistributed income and wealth earned by black labor to generations of white Americans, thereby leaving the former relatively impoverished as a group and the latter relatively privileged as a group. Consider just the value of the African American labor that was expropriated. The white owner’s cost for maintaining an enslaved African American was generally very low, and under many circumstances large profits could be generated from the labor of such a subordinated worker. For example, researcher Larry Neal has calculated that the current (1983) value of the slave labor expropriated by whites from 1620 to 1865 ranges from about $963 billion to as much as $97,064 billion, depending on the rate of interest chosen for the long intervening period. Historical economist James Marketti estimates the dollar value of the labor taken from enslaved African Americans from 1790 to 1860 to be, depending on the historical assumptions, from $7 billion to as much as $40 billion. Such a figure roughly indicates what black individuals and families lost in income because they did not control their labor. Marketti suggests that, if that stolen income is multiplied by taking into account lost interest from then to the present, the current (1983) economic loss (income diverted) for black Americans ranges from $2.1 to $4.7 trillion. Updating these 1983 estimates to today would place the current value of the diverted income from black labor, plus interest, into many trillions of United States dollars.

Numerous white analysts have attacked the idea of white society owing such back wages for slavery; they argue that figuring out the debts of a supposedly too-distant history is just too difficult. Yet such an argument almost always fails to note that the damages done to African Americans did not end with slavery, but persisted for another one hundred years in the form of legal segregation, and then for several more decades in present-day discrimination. The era of black enslavement was not followed by a century of redress, justice, and equality, but rather just the opposite. Moreover, today, there are millions of living African Americans who suffered severely under legal segregation, and many more continue to suffer today from racial discrimination at the hands of many white Americans.

https://harvardblackletter.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2016/10/20-JREJ-49.pdf

Of course I will see the standard retardation by delusional racist whites and those who wannabe white about democrats and liberals, but this is reality and if you have to concoct some crazy shit to deny what is documented in the American record, your ass is a mental case needing to take up residency at your nearest funny farm.

I don't want my kids to grow up in a racial jungle with you.

LOL

 

[IM2]

I don't want my kids to grow up in a racial jungle with you.

LOL

Your kids are going to keep growing up in a racist nation with and because of you.

 

[IM2]

You’ll always be on the bottom. Even if you get reparations, most blacks will do what they did with the stimulus money or lotto winnings. Go blow it on stuff for immediate gratification, in a year they’ll be broke again and complaining again. The only way to get off the bottom is to get an education, work hard, live within your means and don’t have kids before you can afford them.

You in particular claim how successful you are, why aren’t you spending all the time you waste here telling us how horrible we and how unfair things are for you, teaching black kids how to do what you claim you have done?

if you have accomplished half of what you claim, you are not only a racist, but a hypocrite as well.

Incorrect. Too many blacks have business plans but no venture capital. Reparations would provide venture capital. More blacks are goong to college than ever before and not having kids before we can afford them is not the issue. You just keep repeating dumb ass saltine talking points. You know nothing about the black community.

I have spent most of my life doing what you asked. That is why 8 years ago there was a report written that was ignored which said this:

“Today’s young African Americans display the lowest rates of crime and serious risk of any generation that can be reliably assessed.”​

Mike Males, “Why the Gigantic, Decades-Long Drop in Black Youth Crime Threatens Major Interests,” The Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, August 15, 2013

Why the Gigantic, Decades-Long Drop in Black Youth Crime Threatens Major Interests

How can such an encouraging development as a massive drop in youth crime be treated as such bad news that no one will even talk about it? It's worse than that: politicians, crime lobbies, and the news media needs black youths to be murderous thugs.

www.cjcj.org

You run your mouth and your opinion stinks of white supremacy. Shut the fuck up.

 

[westwall]

Your kids are going to keep growing up in a racist nation with and because of you.

More like because of you. Everything you talk about is tinged by your innate racism.

I have never seen you make one post here that was not about race.

It literally consumes you and your hatred is obvious to all.

 

[JoeB131]

My ancestors left Europe because they did not like how they were treated.

Those who do not like America need to do the same ASAP.

Your ancestors had a choice. Black people didn't. They were brought over in chains.

3% of American whites were involved with slavery, and 95% of those were Jews. 70% of American whites in the north thought it was worth a war to stop it. The OP hates my ancestors because they were white, and sweeps aside their sacrifices because the narrative does not fit.

NOt sure whree you get the thing about "Jews", exactly. there weren't a lot of Jews in the Old South.

Most Northerners didn't care that much about Slavery to fight a war over it. If the South hadn't gotten stupid and tried to secede, they'd have probably retained slavery for decades.

 

[westwall]

Your ancestors had a choice. Black people didn't. They were brought over in chains.



NOt sure whree you get the thing about "Jews", exactly. there weren't a lot of Jews in the Old South.

Most Northerners didn't care that much about Slavery to fight a war over it. If the South hadn't gotten stupid and tried to secede, they'd have probably retained slavery for decades.

And blacks owned slaves here as well. New Orleans witnessed at least 40% of slave owners were BLACK.

Kinda inconvenient for you there.

 

[IM2]

More like because of you. Everything you talk about is tinged by your innate racism.

I have never seen you make one post here that was not about race.

It literally consumes you and your hatred is obvious to all.

I won't be gaslit son. I talk about what concerns me. And since race concerns me the most due to the fact it has the most impact on my life, it is what I will talk about the most. Peaking out against white racism is not racism unless you're a white racist. Racism is easy to ignore and easy to tell people not totalj about when you are the one practicing racism. You keep racism alive because you are a racist.

 

[IM2]

And blacks owned slaves here as well. New Orleans witnessed at least 40% of slave owners were BLACK.

Kinda inconvenient for you there.

No, your ability to be disingenuous allows you to dodge a truth you can't face. Black bought enslaved spouses, children and relatives. You are lying about New Orleans.

 

[westwall]

I won't be gaslit son. I talk about what concerns me. And since race concerns me the most due to the fact it has the most impact on my life, it is what I will talk about the most. Peaking out against white racism is not racism unless you're a white racist. Racism is easy to ignore and easy to tell people not totalj about when you are the one practicing racism. You keep racism alive because you are a racist.

You spew constantly about race. You are one of the biggest racists here. And no, I don't give a tinkers damn about the color of a person's skin.

I care about what they do for society. Are they constructive or destructive. ALL racists are destructive.

That makes them all bad. No matter what color they are. Some will evolve into humans, but most won't.

You won't

 

[IM2]

You mean your lies reassure you that you are right.

blacks simply failed to claim their share of the free land

Wrong.

"As early as 1865, certain white Southerners put legal obstacles in place to prevent ex-slaves from acquiring property. Magdol (1977) explains, In the provisional state governments under President Johnson’s protective leniency, planters not only prohibited black landownership but enacted extreme measures of social control that virtually restored slavery. The black codes struck directly at freedmen striving to escape their subordination and to obtain their communities. It was class and race legislation."

On June 21, 1866, Congress passed the Southern Homestead Act. Forty-six million acres of unsold public land in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi were set aside for purchase in 80-acre plots, then later 160-acre plots. The primary beneficiaries, at least in the first six months, were to be landless freedmen. It was a rare full-scale solution attempted to assist freed slaves. In addition, the land was to be for settlers, not sold to speculators or those with mining and timber interests. The desire for land among the former slaves was strong and they deluged local land officers with requests for homesteads (Lanza, 1990). This was true even though settlement would be difficult given that most quality land had been claimed before the Civil War. What remained was primarily swamp land and pine trees that would have required much capital to improve (Gates, 1996; Magdol, 1977). Before much land had been distributed, the Southern Homestead Act, like most Reconstruction programs, was repealed in June of 1876.

The homestead only clause was taken away and the remaining land opened for sale and preemption (Lanza, 1990).

During a period where many citizens were given public land by the government, Blacks who wanted to be small farm owners had to pay for their land and struggle against obstacles that most of their White counterparts did not. This is especially unsettling given that during the initial phase of the Homestead Act, from 1863-1880, most Blacks had just been freed from slavery, faced active discrimination, and were not in a position to negotiate on equal terms. It was a missed opportunity to not use the Homestead Act as a vehicle for Black self-sufficiency, bringing the freed slaves into the existing economy using existing laws to do something at which they already had some experience.

Williams, T. (2000). The Homestead Act: A major asset-building policy in American history (CSD Working Paper No. 00-9). St. Louis, MO: Washington University, Center for Social Development.

https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1045&context=csd_research

 

[IM2]

You spew constantly about race. You are one of the biggest racists here. And no, I don't give a tinkers damn about the color of a person's skin.

I care about what they do for society. Are they constructive or destructive. ALL racists are destructive.

That makes them all bad. No matter what color they are. Some will evolve into humans, but most won't.

You won't

Quit lying. You are a racist. If you weren't, you would not get so upset about blacks stating our legitimate grievance with the government of the united states. Now shut the fuck up.

 

[IM2]

So what do the actual numbers of black slave owners and their slaves tell us? In 1830, the year most carefully studied by Carter G. Woodson, about 13.7 percent (319,599) of the black population was free. Of these, 3,776 free Negroes owned 12,907 slaves, out of a total of 2,009,043 slaves owned in the entire United States, so the numbers of slaves owned by black people over all was quite small by comparison with the number owned by white people. In his essay, " 'The Known World' of Free Black Slaveholders," Thomas J. Pressly, using Woodson's statistics, calculated that 54 (or about 1 percent) of these black slave owners in 1830 owned between 20 and 84 slaves; 172 (about 4 percent) owned between 10 to 19 slaves; and 3,550 (about 94 percent) each owned between 1 and 9 slaves. Crucially, 42 percent owned just one slave.

As Woodson put it in 1924's Free Negro Owners of Slaves in the United States in 1830, "The census records show that the majority of the Negro owners of slaves were such from the point of view of philanthropy. In many instances the husband purchased the wife or vice versa … Slaves of Negroes were in some cases the children of a free father who had purchased his wife. If he did not thereafter emancipate the mother, as so many such husbands failed to do, his own children were born his slaves and were thus reported to the numerators."

Moreover, Woodson explains, "Benevolent Negroes often purchased slaves to make their lot easier by granting them their freedom for a nominal sum, or by permitting them to work it out on liberal terms." In other words, these black slave-owners, the clear majority, cleverly used the system of slavery to protect their loved ones.

Did Black People Own Slaves?

For those who are wondering about the retro title of this black history series, please take a moment to learn about historian Joel A. Rogers

www.theroot.com

There were sellouts and uncle toms that also existed then too, but there weren't enough for white racists today to try pretending that blacks created and lead the slave trade in America. So westvall, your claim is dishonest. In fact, it's pretty much a lie. Blacks owned less than 1 percent of the slaves in America and most of them owned family members, spouses and children.

 

[EMH]

Your ancestors had a choice. Black people didn't. They were brought over in chains.



NOt sure whree you get the thing about "Jews", exactly. there weren't a lot of Jews in the Old South.

Most Northerners didn't care that much about Slavery to fight a war over it. If the South hadn't gotten stupid and tried to secede, they'd have probably retained slavery for decades.

Jefferson Davis was. "Christian," just like Rupert Murdoch, Ted turner, Mitch McConnell....

Everyone with a Jewish name who self IDs as Christian must be a Christian, because Zionist traitors like Joe say so....