Anonymous #1 1d

But ancestry doesnt even matter so much. The key issue is that whites still benefit from a sociopolitical system that keeps them on top, and there were never reparations for slavery. The basis of capitalism is that capital accrues wealth. The stolen labor of slavery is still accruing wealth for whites

73

Anonymous #1 1d

By contrast, 9/11 was a singular event, not a massive sociopolitical system. And obviously, 99.99999999% of Muslims had nothing to do with it. This is comparing apples to oranges

73

Anonymous #1 1d

Muslims didn’t have anything to do with it. It was an inside job.

40

Anonymous #1 1d

12 people thought that was true 🤦

3

Anonymous #1 1d

Only 1.5% of people had slaves in the US

1

Anonymous #5 23h

You have 4 grandparents, 8 great granparents, 16 great great grandparents, 32 great great great grandparents…

19

Anonymous #1 22h

It’s not different and if you think it is you’re just racist

-7

Anonymous #1 22h

Look up the Arab Slave Trade my boy. They too enslaved Africans

2

Anonymous #5 21h

So 385k slave owners is a small amount to u and 1 in 4 white homes owned slaves in the South that’s just in 1860 the numbers were greater in the 1700s and if u go by states the percentage changes as well

24

Anonymous #11 21h

Why don’t they ever ask for representations from people in Africa who their ancestors were enslaved to and sold for tools

-5

Anonymous #5 21h

Reparations

-2

Anonymous #6 21h

The vast majority of Isis’ victims are also Muslims

16

Anonymous #5 20h

Maybe because they live in this country, where the profitability/toruture/exploitation of their ancestors’ labor happened in this country. Even people in the 1800s knew this much so I’m not sure why you don’t get it. The plan under Lincoln via Sherman was the give freed slave families 40 acres and a muel as reparations. Lincoln died, and Andrew Johnson overturned that policy. We could’ve done reparations right then and there to help ppl, instead black people basically went right back to slavery

18

Anonymous #5 20h

With sharecropping contracts that tithed them to the same land and old slavers under the same conditions, only to suffer for another hundred years under lynchings, Jim Crowe, the terror of the kkk, and even after the civil rights act have the federal government conspire to launch a trumped up drug war on the community to once again enslave a generation of black men for private prison slave labor.

11

Anonymous #10 20h

Everyone enslaved everyone pre modernity. This is a common white supremacist talking point fed to ppl online to deflect from the unique horrors of the European triangular slave trade. The Arab slave trade was not racialized, and was not chattel slavery where they were whipped in fields for generations. Arab slavery was often more akin to indentured servitude, with domestic roles and legal avenues for slaves to exit the system. The triangular slave trade was mass racialized chattel slavery of

25

Anonymous #12 20h

It continued into the 20th century and lasted for 1300 years. The fuck you mean “pre modern”

0

Anonymous #10 20h

Much higher volume where they were exploited at industrial scales & treated entirely like commodities w systemic torture of ppl, breaking up of families, mass killings along just the shipping routes, mass rapes, & used as a vehicle of settler colonialism with the genocide of natives & building up of entire societies’ infrastructure thru profiteering enterprises. To equivocate the two is just plain deflection & mischaracterization of the highest order. We’re not Arab either, we’re Americans

18

Anonymous #12 20h

They often castrated African Males and outsourced that to other groups so it wouldn’t be “Haram”

0

Anonymous #10 20h

It did not at any kind of relevantly comparable scale and certainly not in the manner of the triangular slave trade. You have no idea what you’re talking about and prob watched some nonsense YouTube video instead of reading through the actual records and relevant academic literature

19

Anonymous #10 20h

Yeah slavery sucks, that was a pre modern practice of eunuchs in courts, China did it too. Slavery sucks. Now why exactly are we talking about Arabs when slavery as it’s relevant to our country has nothing to do with that? Oh right it’s just a deflection

19

Anonymous #12 20h

Ain’t no one alive deserves my money for “reparations”

-2

Anonymous #5 20h

Well those people had descendants who have been regularly victimized by this country. If we can spend 10 trillion dollars on pointless wars why can’t we do right by people in our own country to rectify a historical wrong for a fraction of that?

13

Anonymous #12 20h

They did it for the Japanese

1

Anonymous #11 20h

Good for them, as long as it ain’t my money

-3

Anonymous #5 19h

Lmfao ur weird bro

6

Anonymous #5 18h

That statistic includes states where slavery was illegal abd ppl who couldn’t own slaves..if u break it down to states where slavery was legal that number increases from 1% to 25%. Then when you break it down by a state by state basis it can get as high as 50% like Mississippi.

5

Anonymous #5 18h

Reparations would be for way more than slavery…yk that right? And we’d be paying for our own reparations too lmao. The US has the money to send trillions to Israel they can use that for reparations and fixing the US

6

Anonymous #3 17h

Yep. Welcome to conservative politics. Where comparing two dissimilar issues is their favorite way of justifying their irrational bigotry. These people are so angry about not understanding the world, but they’re too lazy to educate themselves beyond their own lived experiences. So fucking dumb. 😭

12

Anonymous #6 17h

If you think ISIS existed during 9/11, you’re not a part of the adult conversation.

1

Anonymous #1 17h

Whites are in the middle, not on top. Indians are on top.

-2

Anonymous #11 16h

Slavery makes poverty, not wealth. The poorest states were all slave states.

-1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 16h

The free states were not 25 times more populous than the slave states so that’s just wrong.

-1

Anonymous #1 16h

Slavery creates poverty, not wealth. None of the richest states had slaves, and most of the poorest states did. The south has been the poorest part of the country for centuries.

8

Anonymous #15 16h

This chart is 10 years old…

10

Anonymous #15 16h

Free states typically had large cities and were more densely packed than the South…tf are u on about😭 this isn’t wrong ur just looking at a statistic that includes states where slavery was illegal. In the south that 1% increases to 25% and when you look at individual slave states it can get as high as 49%.

6

Anonymous #15 16h

Also, just because u didn’t own slaves didn’t mean you didn’t participate in slavery nor inspire to become as prominent as the large slave holders. Plantations needed overseers, which were all poor white men. They needed slave auctioneers, transporters, ect. So while a large percentage didn’t own slaves they still very much participated in slavery.

4

Anonymous #15 16h

The South isn’t poor because of slavery. The south is poor because of the end of slavery. Prior to the civil war the South pulled in tons of money from the free labor and agricultural market. We don’t see the South start to have high percentages of poverty until the end of the civil war when slavery ended. If this were true, states like Maryland shouldn’t be as wealthy as they are because it was a slave state…

9

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 16h

Yeah your math is wrong. And in any case, slavery creates poverty, not wealth. The south lost the war due to in large part to having very little industry or money. The south has been the poorest part of the US since 1776.

-1

Anonymous #15 16h

As a matter of fact, prior to the civil war Mississippi, the state that had the highest % of slave owning families, was considered to be the richest state. https://www.unpaidlabor.com/blog/entry/mississippi-america-s-richest-state

5

Anonymous #15 16h

That’s false and the math isn’t wrong. U can look into urself. 75% of ppl in the south didn’t own slaves meaning 25% of ppl did own slaves. If slavery created poverty during the time it was legal it wouldn’t have been a practice especially in a capitalistic society 😭 Mississippi prior to the civil war was considered the richest state and they also had the highest % of slave owners. We don’t see the south become impoverished until AFTER the civil war when slavery was abolished. Ur history is off

3

Anonymous #15 16h

https://www.unpaidlabor.com/blog/entry/mississippi-america-s-richest-state

4

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 16h

That’s just wrong. The north was richer in every way. The vast majority of southerners were dirt poor small farmers. A few rich people hogging wealth made the south poor, not rich.

4

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 16h

I’ve never heard of “unpaidlabor.com”. Do you have a reliable source?

-1

Anonymous #15 16h

The same is said about the North dude 😭 rich ppl in the north monopolized and owned most businesses. A lot of ppl who lived in northern cities were poor immigrants. But to say the south was poor prior to the civil war is inaccurate

3

Anonymous #15 16h

Ur only sources are random charts with no link😬 https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/topic_display.cfm?tcid=106

4

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 16h

The topic is who was poor by American standards, not world standards. This is off topic. The south has always been the poorest part of the US.

-1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 16h

And almost nothing has changed in 10 years.

1

Anonymous #15 16h

“Behind Britain AND northern states.” They’re also looking within the US😬 logically speaking if Slavery caused poverty, especially to those who practiced it, it wouldn’t have been a practice especially seeing that the whole goal was to make money. Slavery allowed the slave holder to make money and not have to pay a whole lot to those who worked to create said profit 😐

6

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 16h

I never claimed rich and poor people didn’t live in the north. You made that up. But the north was overwhelmingly richer than the south before the civil war. The south literally didn’t even have butter.

-1

Anonymous #15 16h

The South today is not going to be the same economically as it was 100 something years ago dude use ur brain. The South now poor because of governmental decisions, low wages, underinvestment, and its infrastructure. The only population left in poverty because of slavery are the descendants of enslaved ppl who obviously didn’t get paid for said labor..

5

Anonymous #15 16h

Being richer ≠ automatically being poor. The South prior to the civil war still generated a lot of money via agriculture…tf do u think the south capitalized on?

5

Anonymous #15 16h

And u made that up…the south had butter prior to the civil war…

4

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 16h

The sources are listed on the charts. And you haven’t even read your own sources lmao. You just posted a link that says the southern states were poorer than the northern states and acted like it made your case. Just take the L dude this is getting pathetic.

1

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 16h

And besides, if all the money was gone after the civil war, then it definitely hasn’t trickled down to white people today.

0

Anonymous themind._.ofhueyfreeman25 16h

Southern agriculture was inferior. Despite having an equal amount of farmland to the north, northern farms were far more productive. For the 19474635th time, slavery creates poverty, not wealth.

-1

Anonymous #15 16h

I don’t think u read the paper. It goes into how the South became one of the poorest. Like it states, prior to the civil war it was one of the richest. Like I’ve been saying and like it says the South didn’t start seeing higher levels of poverty until after the abolition of slavery😐

3

Anonymous #15 16h

The ppl who held onto the wealth, like northern cities, inherited that wealth from their families🫩

4

Anonymous #15 16h

Logically none of that makes sense. The source I gave u states multiple times that prior to the civil war the south was well off due to the institute of slavery fo looked at the title that's basically saying "here's why the south is no longer rich since the turn of the century(aka after the civil war)" take the L bro

3

Anonymous #15 14h

Got the two mixed up, sorry

1

Anonymous #15 11h

Because they lost their wealth when slavery became illegal and then they had a whole ass war about it and then some places were so damn stubborn. They didn’t even tell their slaves until like 1970.

3

Anonymous #14 10h

Yea since slavey is still happening today in some parts of the world and sadly Africa still has slaves

0

Anonymous OP 10h

Every country that uses prison labor has slaves. The US never ended slavery. As per the 13th amendment slavery and indentured servitude can be used as punishment by the state. That’s why we see a rise in black incarceration rates during the Jim Crow era. Jim Crow basically made doing anything while black illegal. Matter of fact, a lot of things that were made law during Jim Crow are still laws today. Jay walking and loitering.

1