- Joined
- Sep 29, 2007
- Messages
- 29,262
- Reaction score
- 10,126
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
This is further evidence that the Tea Party are just right wing progressives who wish to use the government to impose their own particular viewpoint. Limited government? Yeah right! They are nothing but the Obamas of the far right.
Holy crap...did you realize that slavery in Korea didnt end until 1894??? That Koreans engaged in slavery and human trafficking like all other peoples??? WTF??? I though that was solely an American thing begat by the founding fathers...who freqin knew???
Half of the people of Korea are still slaves. There is just one slave owner, but a lot of slaves.
Details? Evidence?
Here is a British case establishing the status of a slave when entering England:
Slavery at common law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
1729:
The legality of slavery in the colonies was established by the British. Not by Johnson v Parker. We simply held on to the tradition and even fought 2 wars because of it.
Of course I do, but we don't deny it and are ashamed of it....unlike the Tea Partiers. Also, why are you attacking other people's countries? Did I deny that slavery didn't exist in our country before?
England...not the Colonies.
Go figure....
"The Tea Party of Tennessee wants to remove incidents of slavery and genocide from American textbooks for fear they would besmirch the image of the Founding Fathers:"
Tea parties issue demands to Tennessee legislators » The Commercial Appeal
We're talking about the people...the Founders. All the TN Tea party is saying is that the Founders shouldn't be generally portrayed as slave-owners because they weren't all slave-owners. All the want is to be fair. They want kids to learn about the abolitionist Founders and the black Founders, not just that Jefferson and Washington owned slaves.
Why wouldn't you want a more well-rounded education on the people who founded this country?
Haha. No. At this point in history, if a slave is legal in England, it's legal in the colonies and vise versa.
I'm sorry, but it sounds to me like the tea party wants the whole truth told. They're tired of kids being taught that the Founders were nothing but a bunch of racists. I was taught that the 3/5 Compromise was put in the Constitution because white people didn't think blacks were fully human. Do you understand how twisted that is to teach a child that? It's twisting history for an agenda.
No, it didn't.
I find it very interesting that some people are refusing to give black people who helped found this country any credit. It's almost as though you think they were all puppets and just "helped" because they had to. It's almost as though you think all black people hated white people back then and vice versa. It's almost as though you think all the white founders were racist. Weird....
A partner conversation to this could be the "Civil Rights Era" which didn't start in the 1960s, but most people think it did.
I've already answered your question. Calm down. It wasn't just signers of our Declaration of Independence that helped found our country.
And yet "John Casor (surname also recorded as Cazara and Corsala[1]), a servant in Northampton County in the Virginia Colony, in 1654 became the first person of African descent in the Thirteen Colonies to be declared by the county court a slave for life.[2]"
VanceMack said:Any other case broguht before the colonial commonwealth?
You live in South Korea, and don't already know that your neighbors to the north are slaves of the government?
How can that be?
I dont excuse it justify it, nor frankly care about it. Slavery was a product of the worlds history. This inane focus on American slavery and the founding fathers is stupid. Teach it all. And its beyond comical that you wade in on a discussion about slavery in America, then when it is pointed out that your own folk engaged in the same behavior you bleat about some 'attack'.
I'll highlight the important part for you. Do you read your own posts after you write them? Here is your statement:
Now, I don't know what you think the "colonial commonwealth" means but as far as history is concerned it means all of Imperial England's territories. As British slavery laws applied to EVERY SINGLE COLONY, including the 13 colonies, what do you think are the implications of a imperial case legalizing the institution of slavery in the colonies 50+ years before Jonson v. Parker?
I'll wait for you to put 2 and 2 together.
Of course, the US wasn't the only country to have a history full of slaves. Of course, my own country had slaves, which I am ashamed of. Yet I don't denied it, unlike the Tea Partiers. Yet you pressed on the issue about Korean slaves, so if that isn't an attack, then what is it? Did I say that the US was the only slave-owning country in history?
I said the same thing about ANYONE that wnats to deny hyistory as I said about the Koreans...teach EVERYTHING! Make sure the youth are taught not only that the Founding Fathers inherited and for a time continued the tradition of slavery but make sure they understand it was the way of the whole world...and yes...even in your little slice of heaven. I dont think they should selectively teach it ANYWHERE and I challenge you to find even a hint of that on anything I posted.
Im sorry you are ashamed at your history. I will tell you plainly that I am not.
How should anyone feel about slavery? I'm not sure how to read what you write here, but the fact is it wasn't just an acceptance of the way the world was, but some actually believed in the way it was. We can work our way through each person, but the point is if it wasn't accepted, even believed in, would we have continued?
The history of the world shows pretty clearly that slavery as an institution was on its way out in civilized countries. England abandoned slavery at about the same time the US did. The US banned the importation of slaves about 50 years before slavery itself was banned. Many of the northern colonies banned slavery before they became states. It is my belief that the civil war was not fought over slavery...slavery was the convenient rallying cry. I also believe that slavery would have run it's course ion short order and we would have had far less racial strife over the last 100 years had it done so.
Im sure thinking people feel repulsed about the thought of and practice of slavery. People that feel ashamed about history that they palyed no part in are in my opinion hystrionic fools.
Perhaps if the worlds true history on slavery including the fact that it is still practiced today were taught, people might have a greater understanding of the truth. I wonder how much further along race relations would have been if people understood history vs hysteria.
I would not argue the civil war was fought over slavery, but instead how southern states want slaves counted both ways, as slaves, keeping them as slsaves, property, and as people to help with representation. The point is, we sadly were not as opposed to slavery as we should have considering our rethoric concerning freedom.
As for feelings, we all have to look back on our past, and we're likley to have feelings about it, be it our personal past or our national past. It is merely human nature to have feelings. I've done things I wouldn't change that I feel bad about, even though I learned. I suspect I'm not alone with that type of feeling. This can be true concerning our nation. We've done things as a nation we should not feel proud about. And it is good to have those things see the light of day and to remind ousrselves that we can do bad things. We're human, not perfect, and if we don't pay attention and stay vigilant, we can do wrong in hurry.
And what you ask be taught is what is taught. However, you seem to be asking that it be taught with a more positive spin, meaning to me that perhaps you can how you feel about it. I could be wrong of course, so I'm not saying I know this is the case for sure. But there really isn't any significant hysteria to any measurable degree.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?