NationStates Jolt Archive

I have just finished reading Roots, a novel by Alex Haley.
For those of you unfamiliar with it, it involves the story of a Gambian boy; Kunta Kinte, his growing up in a Mandinka village, capture by slave traders and both his and his descendants life in the Colonies/USA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roots:_The_Saga_of_an_American_Family


I was wondering, given that a lot of people have denied the Holocaust despite the enourmous amounts of evidence supporting it, why we hear little denial of slavery. I believe it is more likely to disprove something that occurred centuries ago than it is to do so with an event that took place merely sixty years ago.

Are there any theories regarding the "popping up" of Africans in Virginia and other former colonies? Is there some Irvingish historian claiming the whole (or most) of the subject as faux?

The Nazis never publicly defended the holocaust. The Plantation Bourgeoisie did defend slavery for more than half a decade.

That's an interesting question. Why are there no "Slavery Deniers?" I don't quite know the answer. There surely must be a few, but I never hear about or from them.

The Nazis never publicly defended the holocaust. The Plantation Bourgeoisie did defend slavery.

I don't imply justification, simply denial of existance.

It's alright don't worry too much about it. It's alright not to put too much into what people say about "Holocaust denial." Let's face it, it did happen but lest we forget that Jews weren't the only people killed. Certainly the biggest group, per say, of people exterminated by the Nazis were Jews but there were also Catholics, gypsies, communists, hell everyone who opposed them. I usually laugh at people who deny the whole thing but I'm not going to go make it the end all, be all of human history either. Sure it's a black market on the record of humanity but it isn't the "worst" thing we've done. People also forget that more people died in both the Soviet Union under Stalin's regime and China under Mao's regime.

Sometimes you hear somebody say that slavery was mutually beneficial to both the slave and the owner. When you ask if they are serious, sometimes they reply, "Yes. Yes, I am." At this point, they usually dance a jig while humming Trapped in the Closet in its entirety.

I don't imply justification, simply denial of existance.

But that’s why there are no slavery deniers. Hard to deny something that you’re Great White ancestors so masterfully defended on the floors of Congress.
There may be a huge amount of evidence for the holocaust, but no top Nazi officials to verify it to their throngs of skin-headed worshipers.

Because if you deny the Holocaust, a jew will scream at you.

If you deny slavery, a gangsta will shoot your ass.

Wow, there is a sequel to Roots? Roots: The Next Generations. Is that why LeVar Burton was cast for Star Trek: The Next Generation? :p

I have just finished reading Roots, a novel by Alex Haley.
For those of you unfamiliar with it, it involves the story of a Gambian boy; Kunta Kinte, his growing up in a Mandinka village, capture by slave traders and both his and his descendants life in the Colonies/USA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roots:_The_Saga_of_an_American_Family


I was wondering, given that a lot of people have denied the Holocaust despite the enourmous amounts of evidence supporting it, why we hear little denial of slavery. I believe it is more likely to disprove something that occurred centuries ago than it is to do so with an event that took place merely sixty years ago.

Are there any theories regarding the "popping up" of Africans in Virginia and other former colonies? Is there some Irvingish historian claiming the whole (or most) of the subject as faux?

"Toby! Your name is Toby!"
"Kunta Kinte!"
"Toby!"
"Kunta Kinte!"

It's alright don't worry too much about it. It's alright not to put too much into what people say about "Holocaust denial." Let's face it, it did happen but lest we forget that Jews weren't the only people killed. Certainly the biggest group, per say, of people exterminated by the Nazis were Jews but there were also Catholics, gypsies, communists, hell everyone who opposed them. I usually laugh at people who deny the whole thing but I'm not going to go make it the end all, be all of human history either. Sure it's a black market on the record of humanity but it isn't the "worst" thing we've done. People also forget that more people died in both the Soviet Union under Stalin's regime and China under Mao's regime.
Yes, but there’s a difference. Under Stalin, people died for the things they did, or were said to have done or could have done. Under Mao, people died because of sheer incompetence of the government and because of things they did. Under Hitler, people died because of who they were.

“Hitler killed a million Jewish babies just for existing.” Some historian I think

"Toby! Your name is Toby!"
"Kunta Kinte!"
"Toby!"
"Kunta Kinte!"


You forget the part mentioning "toubobs had very small fotos"

That might be sexual propaganda, but it's not worth a thread.:cool:

Look around you! Slavery continues, to this day, in the "land of the free." Yes, the shackles which restrict us are not molded out of steel -- they are less tangible and more sophisticated. We are chained in more subtle ways, but the burden of labor is nonetheless imposed upon us, and those who refuse to work are severely punished. We are remorselessly driven to slave away at our jobs at little more than a subsistence wage; we tirelessly perform our duties day after day, month after month, year after year, with little hope of redemption. We do not have the luxury of being sluggish at our job; neither did the slaves. We do not have the luxury of refusing to work; neither did the slaves. In reality, slavery was never abolished; it simply morphed from one form into another.

There isn't really any denial of anything other then the holocaust, which is a very unique and strange paranoid facination that so many people have.

Look around you! Slavery continues, to this day, in the "land of the free." Yes, the shackles which restrict us are not molded out of steel -- they are less tangible and more sophisticated. We are chained in more subtle ways, but the burden of labor is nonetheless imposed upon us, and those who refuse to work are severely punished. We are remorselessly driven to slave away at our jobs at little more than a subsistence wage; we tirelessly perform our duties day after day, month after month, year after year, with little hope of redemption. We do not have the luxury of being sluggish at our job; neither did the slaves. We do not have the luxury of refusing to work; neither did the slaves. In reality, slavery was never abolished; it simply morphed from one form into another.

http://tn3-1.deviantart.com/fs8/300W/i/2005/317/d/4/Life_Of_An_Emo_3__by_LazyMuFFin.jpg

There isn't really any denial of anything other then the holocaust, which is a very unique and strange paranoid facination that so many people have.

Armenian genocide.

Look around you! Slavery continues, to this day, in the "land of the free." Yes, the shackles which restrict us are not molded out of steel -- they are less tangible and more sophisticated. We are chained in more subtle ways, but the burden of labor is nonetheless imposed upon us, and those who refuse to work are severely punished. We are remorselessly driven to slave away at our jobs at little more than a subsistence wage; we tirelessly perform our duties day after day, month after month, year after year, with little hope of redemption. We do not have the luxury of being sluggish at our job; neither did the slaves. We do not have the luxury of refusing to work; neither did the slaves. In reality, slavery was never abolished; it simply morphed from one form into another.

You can cross state lines, you can marry who you want and you don't have to work from sun up to sun down. You also don't get whip marks unless you want them, you kinky monkey. Comparing your Master Card debt to slavery isn't really going to work.

You can cross state lines, you can marry who you want and you don't have to work from sun up to sun down. You also don't get whip marks unless you want them, you kinky monkey. Comparing your Master Card debt to slavery isn't really going to work.

Let's have puppies together.

Sometimes you hear somebody say that slavery was mutually beneficial to both the slave and the owner. When you ask if they are serious, sometimes they reply, "Yes. Yes, I am." At this point, they usually dance a jig while humming Trapped in the Closet in its entirety.

lol

this IS our form of slavery denial. some people will claim that most slaves were treated well, that they were like family to their owners, that they LOVED their owners. that all-in-all it wasnt that bad.

all look, the colonial slave traders did them a FAVOR, otherwise their decendants would be stuck in pootinky africa to this day. WE DID THEM A FAVOR DAMMIT!

Look around you! Slavery continues, to this day, in the "land of the free." Yes, the shackles which restrict us are not molded out of steel -- they are less tangible and more sophisticated. We are chained in more subtle ways, but the burden of labor is nonetheless imposed upon us, and those who refuse to work are severely punished. We are remorselessly driven to slave away at our jobs at little more than a subsistence wage; we tirelessly perform our duties day after day, month after month, year after year, with little hope of redemption. We do not have the luxury of being sluggish at our job; neither did the slaves. We do not have the luxury of refusing to work; neither did the slaves. In reality, slavery was never abolished; it simply morphed from one form into another.

Yea...
That may be the worst comparison I have ever heard in my life...

Its like saying "People die, so the Holocaust never really ended."

Your job is much better than a slaves job. You don't get whipped or beaten in any form, and if you refuse to work, you get fired, as opposed to killed.

Let's have puppies together.

Let's try to trick the runt into believing it is a kitten.

Yes, but there’s a difference. Under Stalin, people died for the things they did, or were said to have done or could have done. Under Mao, people died because of sheer incompetence of the government and because of things they did. Under Hitler, people died because of who they were.

“Hitler killed a million Jewish babies just for existing.” Some historian I think

Stalin and Mao certainly killed people for who they were too. Land owners, industrialists, capitalists, all of them slaughtered incessently. Sure Hitler was driven by some twisted sense of racism but don't think, for one minute, that Stalin and Mao didn't go around wiping people out for their beliefs or what ethnic groups they were. For example, Stalin rounded up the Chechen people and shoved them on trains for Kazakhstan just for who they were, disregarding how gallantly they fought against the Germans, particularly in Stalingrad. Some say this single act is what breeds most of the resentment today and I tend to agree with them on that one. Mao rounded up wealthy land owners and sent them to the gallows just as well, taking their land and doing whatever it was that he did with it. Ethnic groups were just as much targetted under both Stalin and Mao as they were in Hitler. I think, given the same amount of time that Stalin and Mao had, he too would have rounded up and slaughtered more.

http://tn3-1.deviantart.com/fs8/300W/i/2005/317/d/4/Life_Of_An_Emo_3__by_LazyMuFFin.jpg

I think you must have accidentally posted the wrong picture. The one you attached regards "emo"s.

I think you must have accidentally posted the wrong picture. The one you attached regards "emo"s.

Not that it's a bad thing. Pfft "emo's" :).

You can cross state lines, you can marry who you want and you don't have to work from sun up to sun down. You also don't get whip marks unless you want them, you kinky monkey. Comparing your Master Card debt to slavery isn't really going to work.

You can currently cross state lines because the United States is no longer a loosely united entity composed of separate states with radically different ideologies; it is a more coherent whole. Furthermore, your spouse is not restricted by geographic and racial considerations because such points are tangential to the main concern of the US power structure -- bleeding you dry, forcing you to be productive for the longest possible period of time, and dispensing of you after you age. In fact, that's a difference between modern slavery and slavery in past centuries: after you have outlived your usefulness, you are left to your own devices now. In the past, old slaves were taken care of by their masters. Also, long hours are now known to decrease hourly productivity and thus increase costs, which is something that businesses do not want to incur upon themselves; thus, the working day has been decreased, but out of pecuniary, not altruistic motives. The same can apply to corporeal punishment: it is an inefficient means of handling a particular employee, as you can simply fire them. Indeed, modern slavery is less humane than slavery in the 1800s.

You can currently cross state lines because the United States is no longer a loosely united entity composed of separate states with radically different ideologies; it is a more coherent whole. Furthermore, your spouse is not restricted by geographic and racial considerations because such points are tangential to the main concern of the US power structure -- bleeding you dry, forcing you to be productive for the longest possible period of time, and dispensing of you after you age. In fact, that's a difference between modern slavery and slavery in past centuries: after you have outlived your usefulness, you are left to your own devices now. In the past, old slaves were taken care of by their masters. Also, long hours are now known to decrease hourly productivity and thus increase costs, which is something that businesses do not want to incur upon themselves; thus, the working day has been decreased, but out of pecuniary, not altruistic motives. The same can apply to corporeal punishment: it is an inefficient means of handling a particular employee, as you can simply fire them. Indeed, modern slavery is less humane than slavery in the 1800s.

On the contrary, slavery of the 1800s was significantly MORE brutal and less humane then it is, for the most part, now. Slavery that still exists in the lesser parts of the world is certainly as awful as it was back then but more of the world has developed since then and any realm of slavery that generally exists, as illegal as it is, in those areas is often slightly more humane than it was in the 1800s, when norms were totally different. Back then, murdering someone for insulting your wife or sleeping with her was certainly acceptible.

You can currently cross state lines because the United States is no longer a loosely united entity composed of separate states with radically different ideologies; it is a more coherent whole. Furthermore, your spouse is not restricted by geographic and racial considerations because such points are tangential to the main concern of the US power structure -- bleeding you dry, forcing you to be productive for the longest possible period of time, and dispensing of you after you age. In fact, that's a difference between modern slavery and slavery in past centuries: after you have outlived your usefulness, you are left to your own devices now. In the past, old slaves were taken care of by their masters. Also, long hours are now known to decrease hourly productivity and thus increase costs, which is something that businesses do not want to incur upon themselves; thus, the working day has been decreased, but out of pecuniary, not altruistic motives. The same can apply to corporeal punishment: it is an inefficient means of handling a particular employee, as you can simply fire them. Indeed, modern slavery is less humane than slavery in the 1800s.

So you would rather spend your live picking cotton, under some overseer's whip, being forbid education and the right the move around freely?

So you would rather spend your live picking cotton, under some overseer's whip, being forbid education and the right the move around freely?

Let me pose the question in a different manner: would you like spending your life typing away on a computer in a small cubicle, hour after hour, under the constant specter of being fired for laziness, and working under conditions of great stress? Or would prefer working in the open air, with companions around you with whom you can converse, and no worry whatsoever about your future and virtually no stress? As a wise man once said, you cannot miss something you have not known. If you have not seen the vastness of the world, you will not miss the freedom of locomotion; if you have not attended school, you will not miss the freedom of learning. It would be better to be a slave in the 1800s than to be one now.

You can currently cross state lines because the United States is no longer a loosely united entity composed of separate states with radically different ideologies; it is a more coherent whole. Furthermore, your spouse is not restricted by geographic and racial considerations because such points are tangential to the main concern of the US power structure -- bleeding you dry, forcing you to be productive for the longest possible period of time, and dispensing of you after you age. In fact, that's a difference between modern slavery and slavery in past centuries: after you have outlived your usefulness, you are left to your own devices now. In the past, old slaves were taken care of by their masters. Also, long hours are now known to decrease hourly productivity and thus increase costs, which is something that businesses do not want to incur upon themselves; thus, the working day has been decreased, but out of pecuniary, not altruistic motives. The same can apply to corporeal punishment: it is an inefficient means of handling a particular employee, as you can simply fire them. Indeed, modern slavery is less humane than slavery in the 1800s.

Funny. But I think the sarcasm might be too subtle. Throw in a bit about tricking a runt puppy into thinking it is a kitten and I think you can achieve that high mark of hilarity that you are striving for.

Let me pose the question in a different manner: would you like spending your life typing away on a computer in a small cubicle, hour after hour, under the constant specter of being fired for laziness, and working under conditions of great stress? Or would prefer working in the open air, with companions around you with whom you can converse, and no worry whatsoever about your future and virtually no stress? As a wise man once said, you cannot miss something you have not known. If you have not seen the vastness of the world, you will not miss the freedom of locomotion; if you have not attended school, you will not miss the freedom of learning. It would be better to be a slave in the 1800s than to be one now.

Working in the open air? Companions to converse with? No worries? No stress? What do you think this is a playground? Slaves worked in the open air, yeah the beating sun, they didn't have sun-block. They had hats, maybe, if "Massa" was nice to them. Converse? They whipped all day long. They convsered, yeah in their minds. They had worries, worries if they were going to be killed because they did something wrong. They worried if their children would live a free life or the life they had. Stress? Let's just say they had stress. Certainly there were good masters and there were bad masters but even the good ones didn't treat it like daycare.

Who says you have to work in a cubicle? You have the choice and the option not to but as a slave, the only choice you had was whether or not to keep your mouth shut that day. Though, if you're so hellbent on being a slave, I think there is a flight that leaves for the Sudan in a few hours.

Rather, let me ask. Would you like to do time in a federal prison?

Let me pose the question in a different manner: would you like spending your life typing away on a computer in a small cubicle, hour after hour, under the constant specter of being fired for laziness, and working under conditions of great stress? Or would prefer working in the open air, with companions around you with whom you can converse, and no worry whatsoever about your future and virtually no stress? As a wise man once said, you cannot miss something you have not known. If you have not seen the vastness of the world, you will not miss the freedom of locomotion; if you have not attended school, you will not miss the freedom of learning. It would be better to be a slave in the 1800s than to be one now.


You can still work in an open field nowadays, you are not being forced to do so as before and, above all, physical violence is not the normal rule.

The West is all about choice. Sartre claimed that western society forced choice upon the individual, regardless of his choice to choose.

Finally, you claim that you "cannot miss something you have not known". How about those slaves brought from Africa? Did they simply erase their memories, their homesick feelings, their collective culture?

If you count slavery as being forced to work, you imply that the farmers and tailors should be reduced to slavery to provide you with the things you need to live. The fact is, most people are forced to work by factors which are not dependant on any one, such as the need to eat - you might say that people are slaves to themselves and their needs. If you don't work to grow your food, you need to give something in return to the person who does.

That's all there is to it.

Slaves worked in the open air, yeah the beating sun, they didn't have sun-block.

The ozone layer was not depleted then, as there were no immoral corporations to pollute and poison our planet. Similarly, global warming was not a problem. Slaves became accustomed to the conditions in the American south; indeed, circumstances in contemporaneous Africa were probably harsher.

Converse? They whipped all day long.

That is a flawed view of their status. Whipping was only a concern if a serious transgression had occurred, and they could talk with their companions if doing so did not compromise their work ethic.

They had worries, worries if they were going to be killed because they did something wrong.

That's a ridiculous assertion. Killing a costly investment because of a small mistake would be an idiotic act, and such a deed rarely transpired, if ever. As long as a slave did not attempt to escape, he/she would not have to worry about being executed.

They worried if their children would live a free life or the life they had.

There was no such preoccupation. They were cognizant of the fact that their children would be impressed into slavery.

Stress? Let's just say they had stress.

Let's not.

If you count slavery as being forced to work, you imply that the farmers and tailors should be reduced to slavery to provide you with the things you need to live. The fact is, most people are forced to work by factors which are not dependant on any one, such as the need to eat - you might say that people are slaves to themselves and their needs. If you don't work to grow your food, you need to give something in return to the person who does.

That's all there is to it.

The best reason why there are no slavery deniers is that it was not something that was deliberately concealed from public view. (Most Germans on the street, conversely, were not aware the Holocaust was progressing). Slaves worked openly and their exchanges were recorded in detail.

Let me pose the question in a different manner: would you like spending your life typing away on a computer in a small cubicle, hour after hour, under the constant specter of being fired for laziness, and working under conditions of great stress?

There are plenty of different jobs. I can and have gotten fired. I just find a new job. Freedom is great that way. Plus, I choose to work in a cubicle, or whever. Choice is another good thing about freedom.

Or would prefer working in the open air, with companions around you with whom you can converse, and no worry whatsoever about your future and virtually no stress?

Luckily, I can choose to work in such an environment as that too, since I have liberty and rights and freedom.

Slaves don't have any choice, liberty or rights.

It would be better to be a slave in the 1800s than to be one now.

Employment isn't slavery, and if you really think it is, you need to review this thing called "reality."

I take back what I said earlier about there not being slavery deniers. There are, and they are just as deluded and idiotic as holocaust deniers.

The ozone layer was not depleted then, as there were no immoral corporations to pollute and poison our planet. Similarly, global warming was not a problem. Slaves became accustomed to the conditions in the American south; indeed, circumstances in contemporaneous Africa were probably harsher.
I'm as much as anyone concerned about the hole in the ozone layer but this statement is ridiculous. You mean before there was a hole in the ozone layer the south never knew a day that wasn't fresh with a spring breeze? This is laughable.



That is a flawed view of their status. Whipping was only a concern if a serious transgression had occurred, and they could talk with their companions if doing so did not compromise their work ethic.
What committee did a slave go to to complain? What oversight was there? Only if you answer, "Nobody" and "There wasn't one", do you get this choice and delicious chocolate chip cookie.



That's a ridiculous assertion. Killing a costly investment because of a small mistake would be an idiotic act, and such a deed rarely transpired, if ever. As long as a slave did not attempt to escape, he/she would not have to worry about being executed.
The sweet things in life. What would we do without them?



There was no such preoccupation. They were cognizant of the fact that their children would be impressed into slavery.
They loved this fact. Got them up in the morning. Forgo the coffee; place my children into slavery, thank-you. Nothing like an endless chain of slavery to get the juices flowing.

I'm as much as anyone concerned about the hole in the ozone layer but this statement is ridiculous. You mean before there was a hole in the ozone layer the south never knew a day that wasn't fresh with a spring breeze? This is laughable.

What committee did a slave go to to complain? What oversight was there? Only if you answer, "Nobody" and "There wasn't one", do you get this choice and delicious chocolate chip cookie.

The sweet things in life. What would we do without them?

They loved this fact. Got them up in the morning. Forgo the coffee; place my children into slavery, thank-you. Nothing like an endless chain of slavery to get the juices flowing.

see? even today we have "slavery deniers". instead of intractable saying "modern wage slavery is as bad as that horrible institution of the past" he denies that it was so bad.

since slavery was too embedded in our country's culture and history, its impossilbe to deny. all they can do is minimize the horrors of it until its more like having to work at mcdonalds to support the family.

see? even today we have "slavery deniers". instead of intractable saying "modern wage slavery is as bad as that horrible institution of the past" he denies that it was so bad.

since slavery was too embedded in our country's culture and history, its impossilbe to deny. all they can do is minimize the horrors of it until its more like having to work at mcdonalds to support the family.

It's sad that people who think these things will make more of themselves than a line-cook at McDonalds. They might be off teaching kids somewhere.

Let me pose the question in a different manner: would you like spending your life typing away on a computer in a small cubicle, hour after hour, under the constant specter of being fired for laziness, and working under conditions of great stress? Or would prefer working in the open air, with companions around you with whom you can converse, and no worry whatsoever about your future and virtually no stress?

The former. In the former case I have the ability to quit, and find a better job elsewhere; I also have the power to refuse to work (well, unless I am prohibited by statist compulsion). Furthermore, outside of my job I am pretty much free.

The chattel slave, however, has her entire life controlled by the arbitrary whim of her master, and any disobedience means punishment. She is compelled into servility - constant, brutal servility.

Chattel slavery is the most vile abomination ever inflicted upon human beings.

Do you think, after being liberated, that Blacks would have been content to go back into slavery because it was "better"? You're delusional if you do. And why do you think slaves ran away?