Andre Owens - You ever notice that white Southerners like to yap on about their proud heritage when confronted with atrocities of the Confederacy, yet are quick to tell Black folks to "get over" slavery. The cognitive dissonance is deafening.
Lara Shepherd - I like to point out that the South lost & who wants to be a loser ?
John Orlando - It's easy to contradict oneself when you don't have to worry about being fair or making sense.
Bruce Gettel - I like to tell them to get over the fact that the North won the war . . . . .
Muhammad Rasheed - Lara Shepherd wrote: "I like to point out that the South lost & who wants to be a loser ?"
How did they lose? They formed a hooded resurgence of guerilla warfare troops, forced the Union soldiers to withdraw, recaptured ALL of their plantation lands, repealed all the Reconstruction laws, and formed a cartel of the multi-state sharecropping institution that was ALMOST like slavery.
It's hard to consider that a loss.
Ernst Alexander - Andre, where is all of this anger coming from against white people? As far as the war, there are a lot of black folk who had blood on their hands, Like the southern whites are you still fighting the civil war. I can somewhat understand them, as one of the commenters stated "the South lost and who wants to be a loser" Why is so much given and wasting of energy to their delusions. Also, there were and are a lot of Northern whites who feel the same way as you think the Southern white feel. The Southern states loosing the war is a fact as is slavery, so we all need to get over it and move in ways to make the country better. I think, as long as the whites and blacks are not talking and learning with each other, the haters, black and white win. There is that Divid and Concur attitude a foot.
Muhammad Rasheed - Ernst Alexander wrote: "As far as the war, there are a lot of black folk who had blood on their hands..."
That's because they were fighting for their basic human rights and dignity. They were living in a society that kidnapped them, and delegated them to an inhumane, permanent chattel slavery class. The blood was justly spilled.
Ernst Alexander wrote: "The Southern states loosing the war is a fact..."
A 'fact' is supported by evidence. In this case, since the South reversed everything that the Union soldiers had done, and even forced them back up North, it proves they didn't lose anything. Proclaiming something is a "fact" without anything to back it up at all, is ineffective magic when it so clearly conflicts with the facts of history.
Ernst Alexander - If the south did not loose anything. Tell that to the relatives of both the southern and northern families who lost love ones in that war. Both blacks and whites. In the end the south lost its quest to leave the union and the rich slave owner were force to free the slaves. the problem came about when the government decided to rube salt in the wounds and take lands from the slave owner to give to the slaves. It was a good cession, but illy done. It backed fired and cause even more resentment. The poor white southerner who could not afford to buy land was looked over in favor of the newly freed slaves.
Ernst Alexander - Yes, the slaves were kidnapped and delegated to inhumane conditions, and it was horrible and nut justify on any level; but not let us forget that there were not just the whites slave traders who did this but it was done with the help of other Africans. Looking at the slave trade from only one side does no one any good. What do you propose? To continue to hate and not fight to live and to use slavery as an excuse to not bring about a better life and future. Yes, it is hard to over come the prejudices and injustice that we suffer everyday, but to start out everyday with hate, diminish your own self worth.
Muhammad Rasheed - Ernst Alexander wrote: "If the south did not loose anything. Tell that to the relatives of both the southern and northern families who lost love ones in that war. Both blacks and whites."
All wars look like that, Ernst. War is ugly by it's nature; people are massacred as an acceptable objective towards the greater goal. That's in a sane world it is the choice of last resort.
Ernst Alexander wrote: "In the end the south lost its quest to leave the union and the rich slave owner were force to free the slaves."
Since they drove the Union soldiers back and repealed all of the laws that they disagreed with, they no longer needed to leave the union themselves; they literally reestablished the status quo that they were fighting for anyway. And they replaced the legal chattel slavery with the debt bondage of the sharecropping system, which functioned exactly the same, so they lost nothing but body counts. They 100% retained their preferred way of life.
Ernst Alexander wrote: "the problem came about when the government decided to rube salt in the wounds and take lands from the slave owner to give to the slaves. It was a good cession, but illy done."
No, the South merely did the exact same thing the Iraqis did during Bush's war -- they regroup, hooded themselves, and fought a hit & run, highly-effective guerilla war, that reversed the tide and set ultimate victory firmly within their grasp. Any talk of a Northern victory is only the indoctrination of an historical whitewashing talking devoid of the facts of what was actually going on. The legends & myths were more enduring than the reality, which is often the case during historical whitewashings.
Ernst Alexander wrote: "It backed fired and cause even more resentment."
Yeah, it did...
Ernst Alexander wrote: "The poor white southerner who could not afford to buy land was looked over in favor of the newly freed slaves."
As usual, it was the poor whites who were the paid soldiers and enforcers for the moneyed class, and did all the dirty work. Their biggest reward? To be members in good standing of a race-based class system in which they were considered superior over any other. The poor white decided it was a goal worth dying for.
Muhammad Rasheed - Ernst Alexander wrote: "Yes, the slaves were kidnapped and delegated to inhumane conditions, and it was horrible and nut justify on any level; but not let us forget that there were not just the whites slave traders who did this but it was done with the help of other Africans. Looking at the slave trade from only one side does no one any good."
Looking back on history through the dual lenses of half-truths and mythology does no one any good either, Ernst, especially those in the privileged class who spend a great deal of time justifying their privileged state when they know it comes from America's peculiar and embarrassing legacies. In the beginning, the Africans sold slaves to the Europeans, and why not? It wasn't a big deal at the time since the entire world bought and sold slaves as was the ancient tradition. But for the first time -- under European rule -- the slave trade became BIG business, on the same level of mega-corporate business that we know today. Under that system, familiar again to the obscene amounts of wealth that pass hands today, European slave traders became desperate to ship massive numbers of black skins across the ocean on the dreaded Middle Passage, and they were far too greedy to continue to partner with African slave traders. Consequently they grabbed EVERY African they could catch and threw them in the holds of those foul ships. Word quickly got out that the predatory white men scouring the coasts for black bodies could not be trusted, and ALL should stay away! Naturally this forced the Europeans to change their tactics, which began the system of giving barrels of rum as free gifts to confused, grateful, and ultimately doomed villages and far into the African interior as they would dare to go (this was before the vaccination technology was perfected, and white men feared to tread into the Dark Continent with good reason). Once the villagers were drunk off rum by night fall, the Europeans would attack the now relatively easy targets, and bag, brand and ship 'em for easy profits. This was the number one method of slave taking for centuries; the partnership with the African slave traders barely lasted a decade, yet white guilt continues to blow it out of proportion in a lame and dishonest attempt to sooth their soul's generational burden.
Ernst Alexander wrote: "What do you propose?"
Appeals to law and reason. The white cops freely killing unarmed black youth are but one symptom of many within the fundamentally lopsided classism of our society with it's strong racism brand. The way the system is built, where the whites are naturally favored and advantaged, while token band-aid efforts to alleviate the resentments built up from daily indignities to the blacks remain ineffective, which only breed MORE resentments whenever members of the privileged class continue to pretend there are no inequalities, and everyone is fundamentally equal in society based on their horse-blinders made out of myth and falsehood. When appeals to law and reason fail to work, what will be left accept more resentments and compounded hatreds? How would you feel in that position? Is the continuous advice from those in privilege to simply "get over it" and take the high road sound, or even, wise advice when it comes from them? To me it sounds like a provocation.
Ernst Alexander - I am going to bow out of this exchange because the writer refuse to acknowledge truth and factual account of history. I know what he will write that history is written by the white man so as a black man the historical facts are not to believe. I suppose he al discount the Holocaust were 6000 Jews were murdered. I am so sorry that so much hate can control ones ability to think and see facts and not twist the truth to manipulate unthinking people.
Muhammad Rasheed - What you are doing now is surrendering because your argument lacked anything to back it up, and you have nothing to challenge my argument with. So I win.
You are also attempting an odd misdirection by bringing up the holocaust, which literally has nothing to do with this topic.
You are a sore loser, Ernst. Get your debate game up.
Ernst Alexander - Even Malcolm X realized that hate was not the the way to a peaceful existence. He was murdered for speaking the truth to his Muslin brothers. A large part of the reason that things are not getting done in our government is because the Republicans can not stand to have a black man in the White House. They would have this nation go under do to hate.
Muhammad Rasheed - Ernst Alexander wrote: " He was murdered for speaking the truth to his Muslin brothers."
Are you threatening to murder me? Stand down, it's not that serious. I'm sure you'll manage to win an argument if you start using facts occasionally and practicing more.
Ernst Alexander - It seems that you have no factual evidence to support any of the statements that you have made. So I wish you all the best. Don't follow blindly open your eyes and see how you are being used.
Muhammad Rasheed - FACT #1: The South donned hoods, regrouped, and began a guerilla warfare campaign that forced the Union soldiers to retreat.
Source - 1.) Fleming, Walter J., Ku Klux Klan: Its Origins, Growth and Disbandment, p. 27, 1905, Neale Publishing.
2.) W. E. B. Du Bois, Black Reconstruction in America: 1860–1880, New York: Oxford University Press, 1935; reprint, The Free Press, 1998
3.) "Ku Klux Klan, Organization and Principles, 1868". State University of New York at Albany.
Muhammad Rasheed - FACT #2: reconstruction laws were repealed.
Source - C. Vann Woodward, Reunion and reaction: the compromise of 1877 and the end of reconstruction (1956)
Muhammad Rasheed - FACT #3: The sharecropping institution replaced chattel slavery and that form of bondage functioned the same in continuing white on black oppression.
Source - 1.) Sharon Monteith, ed. (2013). The Cambridge Companion to the Literature of the American South.
2.) Sharecroppers All. Arthur F Raper and Ira De A. Reid. Chapell Hill 1941. The University of North Carolina Press.
3.) Robert Tracy McKenzie, "Sharecropping," Tennessee Encyclopedia of History and Culture.
Ernst Alexander - All these references tell you that the Klan did organized until after the civil war and had nothing to do with forcing the Union solders to leave. You win, please. When you can become an expert in American history and can deal with facts and not made up information to justify your way of thinking.
Muhammad Rasheed - FACT #4: The relationship between African slave sellers and European slave buyers didn't last long. The greed of Big Business quickly caused the Europeans to betray their African allies and capture them as well, leading to the getting the villages drunk with rum and then attacking them method, that was the primary technique used by European slave takers for centuries.
Source - Edward Wilmot Blyden, Christianity, Islam and the Negro Race, London, W. B. Whittingham & Co., 1887; 2nd Edition 1888
Ernst Alexander - As I remember this started with my question to Andre, not you. So please allow him to give me his answer. thank you.
Muhammad Rasheed - I must be standing in the way with my arms outstretched preventing him from typing, is that it? lol
Muhammad Rasheed - You hear that, Andre? The reason you haven't responded to Ernst's question is because I have been bullying you.
I wouldn't take that from me if I were you. It's rude.
Andre Owens - You guys seem to be doing a good job without my input. To answer Ernst' question:
No, I'm not mad at white people, I'm mad at confederate apologists.
Muhammad Rasheed - Fuck. He got passed me.
You're slippery.
No comments:
Post a Comment