a slavery question... - GoFuckYourself.com

galleryseek · 03-07-2003, 07:07 PM

as far as i know, the black people were literally pulled from africa (primarily) and were made slaves...

a friend here is telling me that black people from africa sold their own??

i was under the impression that they didn't have a choice?

which is true

Sly_RJ · 03-07-2003, 07:08 PM

Your friend is right, and so are you. They didn't have a choice, but the ones who did have a choice sold their own.

galleryseek · 03-07-2003, 07:12 PM

and also, he said that only 3% of slaves were treated really bad...

pr0 · 03-07-2003, 07:12 PM

Most of them were sold into slavery by their own chieftans/village leaders, in most cases against their own will.

Of course history from that period was fairly vague so its hard to pinpoint every instance.

Sly_RJ · 03-07-2003, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by galleryseek
and also, he said that only 3% of slaves were treated really bad...

That doesn't sound right.

rooster · 03-07-2003, 07:14 PM

also, i belive most of the slave ships were owned by jews.

pr0 · 03-07-2003, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by galleryseek
and also, he said that only 3% of slaves were treated really bad...

Also correct, most plantation owners treated their servants with respect, teaching them english, how to read & write, providing medical assistance etc.

But of course these people were slaves, so they couldn't just take a month off & go into town for hookers & 40's. But overall they were treated very humanely, about as humane as you can get having slaves.

gothweb · 03-07-2003, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by galleryseek
and also, he said that only 3% of slaves were treated really bad...

Being a slave is being treated really badly.

Gutterboy · 03-07-2003, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rooster
also, i belive most of the slave ships were owned by jews.

Strange coincidence. They control the media, entertainment industy, all the banks, and Oprano as well. Its enough to make you think some sort of conspiracy is going on!

pr0 · 03-07-2003, 07:19 PM

In many instances slave families were almost treated as if they were extended family, invited to dinner on holidays, played with their masters children etc. etc.

If you want to see a parrallel to 1800's slavery, take a look at mexican immigration & field workers, basically the same thing.

The owner of the orange grove won't pay them shit, but has a vested interest in his workers safety, health & general well being.

This is all historical fact, i'm not pulling this out of my ass

Sly_RJ · 03-07-2003, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pr0

Also correct, most plantation owners treated their servants with respect, teaching them english, how to read & write, providing medical assistance etc.

But of course these people were slaves, so they couldn't just take a month off & go into town for hookers & 40's. But overall they were treated very humanely, about as humane as you can get having slaves.

No shit?

Where did you hear/read this? If it's true, I've been brainwashed by the public school system! Ahh! Imagine that.

TDF · 03-07-2003, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pr0

Also correct, most plantation owners treated their servants with respect, teaching them english, how to read & write, providing medical assistance etc.

But of course these people were slaves, so they couldn't just take a month off & go into town for hookers & 40's. But overall they were treated very humanely, about as humane as you can get having slaves.

wahahaha....what fairy tale book were u reading from? the whole slavery bit came from the initial plan of having indentured servants (they would be slaves for only seven years and set go) but the law became they could own slaves as long as they wanted to..

also at that time America was blossoming from the reaps of slavery (cotton etc..) so why in the hell would some plantation owner teach someone a new language when they were ripped from their homeland,stripped of their family,beaten to a pulp daily, and worked from sunup to sundown for the prividledge of living to be a slave?

cold_ice · 03-07-2003, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pr0

Also correct, most plantation owners treated their servants with respect, teaching them english, how to read & write, providing medical assistance etc.

But of course these people were slaves, so they couldn't just take a month off & go into town for hookers & 40's. But overall they were treated very humanely, about as humane as you can get having slaves.

Your wrong. It was against the law to teach a black person to read in most southern states. If they were found with a book they would get whipped in public.

oldtimer · 03-07-2003, 07:24 PM

Slaves were purchased from Africans and the treatment they got from American buyers was far better than what was in store for them otherwise. Most that remained in Africa were either worked to death or slaughtered.

The history of slave trading in Africa isnt vague at all. Its well documented. You really think ship crews went into the jungles and rounded people up? No way. The real slave traders were the Africans themselves.

pr0 · 03-07-2003, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sly_RJ

No shit?

Where did you hear/read this? If it's true, I've been brainwashed by the public school system! Ahh! Imagine that.

Imagine that!

Yes sir, all correct information, i'll be happy to give you some sources to check out.

Sly_RJ · 03-07-2003, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by toodamnfli

so why in the hell would some plantation owner teach someone a new language when they were ripped from their homeland,stripped of their family,beaten to a pulp daily, and worked from sunup to sundown for the prividledge of living to be a slave?

Well... a sick or injured slave would be worthless. As would a slave that couldn't speak English.

I don't buy the read and write part though...

nocostporn · 03-07-2003, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by galleryseek
and also, he said that only 3% of slaves were treated really bad...

quote of the day my friend

TDF · 03-07-2003, 07:27 PM

btw, the plan for indentured servants weren't planned for blacks, they were actually used for whites...but alas the africans were tricked into believing they would be weened into society after their tenure was up( how ironic)

White indentured servants came from all over Great Britain. Men, women, and sometimes children signed a contract with a master to serve a term of 4 to 7 years. In exchange for their service, the indentured servants received their passage paid from England, as well as food, clothing, and shelter once they arrived in the colonies. Some were even paid a salary. When the contract had expired, the servant was paid freedom dues of corn, tools, and clothing, and was allowed to leave the plantation. During the time of his indenture, however, the servant was considered his master?s personal property and his contract could be inherited or sold. Prices paid for indentured servants varied depending on skills.

While under contract a person could not marry or have children. A master?s permission was needed to leave the plantation, to perform work for anyone else, or to keep money for personal use. An unruly indentured servant was whipped or punished for improper behavior. Due to poor living conditions, hard labor, and difficulties adjusting to new climates and native diseases, many servants did not live to see their freedom. Often servants ran away from their masters. Since they often spoke English and were white, runaway servants were more difficult to recapture than black slaves. If runaway servants were captured, they were punished by increasing their time of service.

Since indentures were not recorded, information about indentured servants at Stratford is scarce. Most information has been taken from advertisements for runaway servants and court records. Some of the male indentured servants were highly skilled laborers, holding such jobs as bricklayer, joiner, plasterer, cook, clerk, gardener, coachman, butcher, blacksmith, and musician. Female indentured servants performed domestice chores like laundry, sewing, and housekeeping.

NetRodent · 03-07-2003, 07:28 PM

There's propaganda on both sides of the slavery debate. Obvious it was not a walk in the park being a slave. By the same token, it seems very unlikely that most slaves were beaten to a pulp daily. Since slaves were rather expensive, it wouldn't make sense to risk damaging one without good reason.

TDF · 03-07-2003, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sly_RJ

Well... a sick or injured slave would be worthless. As would a slave that couldn't speak English.

I don't buy the read and write part though...

hence the term 'slavedriver'

theking · 03-07-2003, 07:29 PM

Only a relative small percentage of the Southern and Northern populace owned slaves. Most people were to poor to own slaves. Those that did own slaves, generally speaking, treated them at least as well as they treated their livestock, in the sense that it was to their benefit to keep them healthy and fed well enough to perform a good day of work. Treating a human at least as well as a good mule...well make your own judgement.

FATPad · 03-07-2003, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by galleryseek
as far as i know, the black people were literally pulled from africa (primarily) and were made slaves...

a friend here is telling me that black people from africa sold their own??

i was under the impression that they didn't have a choice?

which is true

Tribal wars in africa led to people being captured. People captured were sold as slaves.

Of course whitey captured a few himself. But the blackey's sold whitey quite a few slaves, too.

TDF · 03-07-2003, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by toodamnfli
btw, the plan for indentured servants weren't planned for blacks, they were actually used for whites...but alas the africans were tricked into believing they would be weened into society after their tenure was up( how ironic)

White indentured servants came from all over Great Britain. Men, women, and sometimes children signed a contract with a master to serve a term of 4 to 7 years. In exchange for their service, the indentured servants received their passage paid from England, as well as food, clothing, and shelter once they arrived in the colonies. Some were even paid a salary. When the contract had expired, the servant was paid freedom dues of corn, tools, and clothing, and was allowed to leave the plantation. During the time of his indenture, however, the servant was considered his master?s personal property and his contract could be inherited or sold. Prices paid for indentured servants varied depending on skills.

While under contract a person could not marry or have children. A master?s permission was needed to leave the plantation, to perform work for anyone else, or to keep money for personal use. An unruly indentured servant was whipped or punished for improper behavior. Due to poor living conditions, hard labor, and difficulties adjusting to new climates and native diseases, many servants did not live to see their freedom. Often servants ran away from their masters. Since they often spoke English and were white, runaway servants were more difficult to recapture than black slaves. If runaway servants were captured, they were punished by increasing their time of service.

Since indentures were not recorded, information about indentured servants at Stratford is scarce. Most information has been taken from advertisements for runaway servants and court records. Some of the male indentured servants were highly skilled laborers, holding such jobs as bricklayer, joiner, plasterer, cook, clerk, gardener, coachman, butcher, blacksmith, and musician. Female indentured servants performed domestice chores like laundry, sewing, and housekeeping.

i wonder if ANY of my ancestors were treated THIS good..

cold_ice · 03-07-2003, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by oldtimer
. Most that remained in Africa were either worked to death or slaughtered.

WTF do you think happen to them here.

Probono · 03-07-2003, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rooster
also, i belive most of the slave ships were owned by jews.

And most slave owners were jews too. And most slaves were jews too, and most horses were jews too. Yup jews always ran the world. Keep your ignorance under control.

Sly_RJ · 03-07-2003, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by toodamnfli

hence the term 'slavedriver'

That doesn't make sense though.

With all the money invested into the slave, they needed to be able to communicate at a fairly good level, and the slave also needed to be fairly healthy in order to perform the work properly.

I see two sides of the story slowly opening up.

FATPad · 03-07-2003, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by cold_ice

Your wrong. It was against the law to teach a black person to read in most southern states. If they were found with a book they would get whipped in public.

From what I understand, this is true.

Someone already said it...they took good enough care of the slaves to allow them to do the work. You don't buy an ox to plow your fields and whip the thing to death for shits and giggles.

Some of the slave owners probably did take good care of their slaves and treat them like extended family (sort of). The large plantations most likely treated them like livestock.

pr0 · 03-07-2003, 07:33 PM

Beaten to a pulp daily? Come on dude thats bullshit, you've watched too many movies.

cold_ice · 03-07-2003, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by toodamnfli

i wonder if ANY of my ancestors were treated THIS good..

Funny how most people here would say yes.

cold_ice · 03-07-2003, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sly_RJ

That doesn't make sense though.

With all the money invested into the slave, they needed to be able to communicate at a fairly good level, and the slave also needed to be fairly healthy in order to perform the work properly.

I see two sides of the story slowly opening up.

Bro you need to go do some reading, very few were taught anything besides how to do their duties. Most white people back then barely finished 5th grade they did not want their slave to feel like an equal.

TDF · 03-07-2003, 07:38 PM

also considering black people were considered 3/5ths of a person by law..which means we werent even considered a whole person

cold_ice · 03-07-2003, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pr0
Beaten to a pulp daily? Come on dude thats bullshit, you've watched too many movies.

Dude they were treated like animals. Someone fed you a load of shit and you ate it up.

cold_ice · 03-07-2003, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by toodamnfli
also considering black people were considered 3/5ths of a person by law..which means we werent even considered a whole person

Was it even that much i tought it was less than that.

cold_ice · 03-07-2003, 08:04 PM

look here #31

Schwick · 03-07-2003, 08:11 PM

I think the real question that should be asked here is how many do what they want and not what they feel. We are a slave to our own feelings and not wants my friends.

03-07-2003, 07:07 PM	#1
galleryseek Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 8,234	a slavery question... as far as i know, the black people were literally pulled from africa (primarily) and were made slaves... a friend here is telling me that black people from africa sold their own?? i was under the impression that they didn't have a choice? which is true

03-07-2003, 07:08 PM	#2
Sly_RJ Live Hard - Die Hard Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Ready to leave... Posts: 17,042	Your friend is right, and so are you. They didn't have a choice, but the ones who did have a choice sold their own. __________________ PHAT SERVERS - Quality dedicated hosting at a quality price! sly AT phatservers DOT com - 147479144

03-07-2003, 07:24 PM	#14
oldtimer Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 250	Slaves were purchased from Africans and the treatment they got from American buyers was far better than what was in store for them otherwise. Most that remained in Africa were either worked to death or slaughtered. The history of slave trading in Africa isnt vague at all. Its well documented. You really think ship crews went into the jungles and rounded people up? No way. The real slave traders were the Africans themselves. __________________ Im here to help surfers find relevant content

03-07-2003, 07:27 PM	#18
TDF Triple OG nigga on GFY Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: in the BP4L family compound Posts: 27,296	btw, the plan for indentured servants weren't planned for blacks, they were actually used for whites...but alas the africans were tricked into believing they would be weened into society after their tenure was up( how ironic) White indentured servants came from all over Great Britain. Men, women, and sometimes children signed a contract with a master to serve a term of 4 to 7 years. In exchange for their service, the indentured servants received their passage paid from England, as well as food, clothing, and shelter once they arrived in the colonies. Some were even paid a salary. When the contract had expired, the servant was paid freedom dues of corn, tools, and clothing, and was allowed to leave the plantation. During the time of his indenture, however, the servant was considered his master?s personal property and his contract could be inherited or sold. Prices paid for indentured servants varied depending on skills. While under contract a person could not marry or have children. A master?s permission was needed to leave the plantation, to perform work for anyone else, or to keep money for personal use. An unruly indentured servant was whipped or punished for improper behavior. Due to poor living conditions, hard labor, and difficulties adjusting to new climates and native diseases, many servants did not live to see their freedom. Often servants ran away from their masters. Since they often spoke English and were white, runaway servants were more difficult to recapture than black slaves. If runaway servants were captured, they were punished by increasing their time of service. Since indentures were not recorded, information about indentured servants at Stratford is scarce. Most information has been taken from advertisements for runaway servants and court records. Some of the male indentured servants were highly skilled laborers, holding such jobs as bricklayer, joiner, plasterer, cook, clerk, gardener, coachman, butcher, blacksmith, and musician. Female indentured servants performed domestice chores like laundry, sewing, and housekeeping. __________________ Sig heil

03-07-2003, 07:28 PM	#19
NetRodent Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: In the walls of your house. Posts: 3,985	There's propaganda on both sides of the slavery debate. Obvious it was not a walk in the park being a slave. By the same token, it seems very unlikely that most slaves were beaten to a pulp daily. Since slaves were rather expensive, it wouldn't make sense to risk damaging one without good reason. __________________ "Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats." --H.L. Mencken

03-07-2003, 07:12 PM	#3
galleryseek Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 8,234	and also, he said that only 3% of slaves were treated really bad...

03-07-2003, 07:12 PM	#4
pr0 rockin tha trailerpark Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: ~Coastal~ Posts: 23,088	Most of them were sold into slavery by their own chieftans/village leaders, in most cases against their own will. Of course history from that period was fairly vague so its hard to pinpoint every instance.

03-07-2003, 07:14 PM	#6
rooster Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 2,384	also, i belive most of the slave ships were owned by jews.

03-07-2003, 07:19 PM	#10
pr0 rockin tha trailerpark Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: ~Coastal~ Posts: 23,088	In many instances slave families were almost treated as if they were extended family, invited to dinner on holidays, played with their masters children etc. etc. If you want to see a parrallel to 1800's slavery, take a look at mexican immigration & field workers, basically the same thing. The owner of the orange grove won't pay them shit, but has a vested interest in his workers safety, health & general well being. This is all historical fact, i'm not pulling this out of my ass

03-07-2003, 07:29 PM	#21
theking Nice Kitty Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: The good old USA!!! Posts: 21,053	Only a relative small percentage of the Southern and Northern populace owned slaves. Most people were to poor to own slaves. Those that did own slaves, generally speaking, treated them at least as well as they treated their livestock, in the sense that it was to their benefit to keep them healthy and fed well enough to perform a good day of work. Treating a human at least as well as a good mule...well make your own judgement. __________________ When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me! FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.html

03-07-2003, 07:33 PM	#28
pr0 rockin tha trailerpark Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: ~Coastal~ Posts: 23,088	Beaten to a pulp daily? Come on dude thats bullshit, you've watched too many movies.

03-07-2003, 07:38 PM	#31
TDF Triple OG nigga on GFY Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: in the BP4L family compound Posts: 27,296	also considering black people were considered 3/5ths of a person by law..which means we werent even considered a whole person __________________ Sig heil

03-07-2003, 08:04 PM	#34
cold_ice Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: cali Posts: 3,027	look here #31

03-07-2003, 08:11 PM	#35
Schwick Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Right here, right now. Posts: 543	I think the real question that should be asked here is how many do what they want and not what they feel. We are a slave to our own feelings and not wants my friends.