Racism: the Dying Regime

[Sgt1stClassPerkerwood]

^i like you.

[Sgt1stClassPerkerwood]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Rhuma7]

According to colonial records, the first slave owner in the United States was a black man.

Prior to 1655 there were no legal slaves in the colonies, only indentured servants. All masters were required to free their servants after their time was up. Seven years was the limit that an indentured servant could be held. Upon their release they were granted 50 acres of land. This included any Negro purchased from slave traders. Negros were also granted 50 acres upon their release.

Anthony Johnson was a Negro from modern-day Angola. He was brought to the US to work on a tobacco farm in 1619. In 1622 he was almost killed when Powhatan Indians attacked the farm. 52 out of 57 people on the farm perished in the attack. He married a female black servant while working on the farm.

When Anthony was released he was legally recognized as a “free Negro” and ran a successful farm. In 1651 he held 250 acres and five black indentured servants. In 1654, it was time for Anthony to release John Casor, a black indentured servant. Instead Anthony told Casor he was extending his time. Casor left and became employed by the free white man Robert Parker.

Anthony Johnson sued Robert Parker in the Northampton Court in 1654. In 1655, the court ruled that Anthony Johnson could hold John Casor indefinitely. The court gave judicial sanction for blacks to own slave of their own race. Thus Casor became the first permanent slave and Johnson the first slave owner.

Whites still could not legally hold a black servant as an indefinite slave until 1670. In that year, the colonial assembly passed legislation permitting free whites, blacks, and Indians the right to own blacks as slaves.

By 1699, the number of free blacks prompted fears of a “Negro insurrection.” Virginia Colonial ordered the repatriation of freed blacks back to Africa. Many blacks sold themselves to white masters so they would not have to go to Africa. This was the first effort to gently repatriate free blacks back to Africa. The modern nations of Sierra Leone and Liberia both originated as colonies of repatriated former black slaves.

However, black slave owners continued to thrive in the United States.

By 1830 there were 3,775 black families living in the South who owned black slaves. By 1860 there were about 3,000 slaves owned by black households in the city of New Orleans alone.

[Malice_Mizer]

Said this before, will say it again:

It is not all about slavery. Slavery is not the sole grievance where, if you prove multilateral culpability, the grievance is nullified. It's also not just about black Americans' history. It's about how white Americans interact(ed) with non-white people, and how they used the political and economic power they wield(ed) over others for centuries.

[Rhuma7]

Originally Posted by Malice_Mizer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Said this before, will say it again:

It is not all about slavery. Slavery is not the sole grievance where, if you prove multilateral culpability, the grievance is nullified. It's also not just about black Americans' history. It's about how white Americans interact(ed) with non-white people, and how they used the political and economic power they wield(ed) over others for centuries.

It's also about how black families werent breaking a sweat gobbling up slaves like they were apples at a market. Which is quite interesting regardless of your current agenda in this thread.

[Malice_Mizer]

Originally Posted by Rhuma7 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's also about how black families werent breaking a sweat gobbling up slaves like they were apples at a market. Which is quite interesting regardless of your current agenda in this thread.

Ok. Goodness, where to begin.

First of all, the first slave-holder in the American colonies was indeed a freed African slave himself. Upon his death, his land and property were seized by Virginia because they claimed he was an illegal alien and therefore had no rights.

The insidious fact that you seem to be overlooking in this entire thing is that black people still owned black slaves. It didn't go the other way around, where black people owned white slaves or something. Black people who were free, wanted to engage in agriculture (what else could they honestly do if they wanted to generate an inheritance and property), and had the capital to make an investment involved themselves in the production norms as their surroundings dictated. It was not a relationship where, "You are racially inferior to me because of the color of your skin, and therefore are destined by God's will to toil and be subservient to me, the superior white man," which was the basis and philosophy of the white supremacist social order that erected and defended the institution of slavery up until the Civil War. They did not consider black people to be human beings, but rather a piece of amoral property.

In the year 1830, 13% of black Americans were free. I don't have to tell you where the other 87% were. Of the total number of slaves at that time (~2M), about .6% of them were owned by black people. Further, of the free black Americans who did own slaves, 42% of them owned a single slave.

Interesting bit of history, but I'm unsure of the point you're even trying to make. Is your point that, because black people also held slaves, albeit at a ridiculously lower frequency and quantity, that it somehow absolves the history of slavery as a specifically white supremacist institution in this country?

"It's also about how black families werent breaking a sweat gobbling up slaves like they were apples at a market."

What does this mean, exactly..? "Black families?" As though slave ownership was some sort of norm for the black community? As though freedom in general was anywhere near a norm for the black community for hundreds of years? Nearly 90% of all black people on this continent were enslaved at any given point in our history prior to 1863, and the others certainly weren't all laying around, systematically launching the Triangle Trade and establishing hereditary lines of royalty whose wealth and prestige are still visible today.

[Rhuma7]

Originally Posted by Malice_Mizer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What does this mean, exactly..? "Black families?" As though slave ownership was some sort of norm for the black community? As though freedom in general was anywhere near a norm for the black community for hundreds of years? Nearly 90% of all black people on this continent were enslaved at any given point in our history prior to 1863, and the others certainly weren't all laying around, systematically launching the Triangle Trade and establishing hereditary lines of royalty whose wealth and prestige are still visible today.

Let me ask you... Who is supposed to be liable for the global slavery of our brothers? Who in this day and age should feel responsible for what happened and the way things were? Am I to feel guilty or in some way in debt to these families descendant from slaves? When in reality there might be a huge margin of blacks in america that were actually descendants of slavers of blacks!

When we talk racism, you have to go back to slavery, it is basically the root of the pain and oppression these people feel.

I am not racist I will say that bluntly, I've smoked more pot with blacks than white people and never did I feel like I should be sorry for anything my possible ancestors did.

So, lets have some real talk, what the fuck does the black community expect from people? Or is it only the government and thus tax payers? Affirmative action x2? Are there any laws still affecting blacks?

From my understanding this whole uprising lately over the race card was due to the zimmerman trial and quite frankly, I saw more blatant racism from trayvons family than anything.

[mtb tripper]

Originally Posted by Vineyea [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm not quite sure what the story is behind this sudden outrage and attention to racial and ethnic heritage on the forums. Honestly, I havn't watched T.V. for the past three months and I'm in a void of understanding concerning this latest thread of inquiry... It should be obvious to any educated person that the myth of racism is somehow, far be it from me why the fuck this is, striking a chord and becoming a subject of "debate".

There's nothing to see here. There's no real debate. I can argue about the fundamental nature of the space-time you exist in. The very environment you call home, being subject to rules derived from a guess, who's antecedent structure is a hypothetical law. I'm tired of this shit. Shut the fuck up already...

Do you want my prediction? It's this: the old racist fucks are going to die. Their children? Their children are going to be an ignorant minority. Eventually what? Eventually people in the future will mock our inquiry, not because the intellectual capacities to understand it are minimal, but because the 'achilles heel' refutation is simply intrinsic to any coherent understanding of an adequately modeled world.

And speaking of models, it's good for people to be educated in the historical context of the events we witness. I wasn't around in the 60's. I know there are people alive today who have seen, witnessed, experienced, and been poisoned by the racial animosity that makes up a good portion of this nation's history... To this end I suggest a book I wasn't able to finish when I first enrolled in college (it was a difficult read), and that is "waiting till the midnight hour: a narrative history of the black power movement in America".

Engaging in a debate with a comprehensive view is the best thing we can do. Having read that book or not, I understand that the differences between ethnicities is culture and skin color. There isn't too much more than that--- I defy anyone who would like to suggest otherwise.

...I don't mean to attack anybody here. There's no one person I'm aiming at. It isn't that I carry a grudge against this post or that. Instead the problem seems to be that I have generalized my experiences into more broad and encompassing princples. Those thingies are simply unacceptable. I offer these words of wisdom in their stead: "You know what I want to think of myself? As a human being. Because, I mean i don't want to be like "as Confucious say," but under the sky, under the heavens there is but one family. It just so happens that people are different." --Bruce Lee

The old fucks you speak of that are going to die, are veterans and heroes to this nation, and are the only true and respectable beings left on this earth

[Vineyea]

Originally Posted by mtb tripper [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The old fucks you speak of that are going to die, are veterans and heroes to this nation, and are the only true and respectable beings left on this earth

I've seen the rows of white crosses too. I have respect for the heroes and their sacrafices; their suffering, story, legacy. When I see those fields going by and the crosses move from solid rows to solid masses like the rows of seats in a movie theatre I stop trying to make a statement for about what each one of those persons died. You can't do it justice, and it isn't your place to define their lives, just as it isn't their place to define mine. They made a sacrifice, not a down payment.

[Malice_Mizer]

There are also conflicting historical records concerning the first "real slave" in the American colonies.

There's also John Punch, who in 1640 tried to escape indentured servitude and was sentenced to life as an indentured servant (slave) in Virginia. According to genealogists, Barack Obama is a descendant of this man by his mother's side.