Should slave owners be removed from the dollar bill?

Chai: I apologize but, earlier you said you were leaving and yet
you continue to post.

0 Replies

jasonrest wrote:

Chai: I apologize but, earlier you said you were leaving and yet
you continue to post.

Apology accepted jason.

Here's a interesting read....

Black Slave Owners in the South

Here's some, I think some facinating numbers....I seem to remember learning all this in the past, not from this source though.

According to federal census reports, on June 1, 1860 there were nearly 4.5 million Negroes in the United States, with fewer than four million of them living in the southern slaveholding states. Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves. Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. The country's leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves, or 28 percent of the free Negroes in that city.

To return to the census figures quoted above, this 28 percent is certainly impressive when compared to less than 1.4 percent of all American whites and less than 4.8 percent of southern whites. The statistics show that, when free, blacks disproportionately became slave masters.

The majority of slaveholders, white and black, owned only one to five slaves. More often than not, and contrary to a century and a half of bullwhips-on-tortured-backs propaganda, black and white masters worked and ate alongside their charges; be it in house, field or workshop. The few individuals who owned 50 or more slaves were confined to the top one percent, and have been defined as slave magnates.

I wonder how many African Americans have skeletons in their closet, not wanting to talk about how great-great-great uncle Emil own a few slaves in New Orleans?

How many African Americans have black ancestors who were slave owners, and don't even know it?

I don't know if you are black or not jason, but would you want your great-great-great uncle Emils portrait or statue come down, or his face stricken from the letterhead of the prosperous company he started generations ago, with slave labor, which now supports several hundred families?

0 Replies

George Washington could swear like a mule skinner, too. At Kipp's Bay, when the militia ran away, George began to curse, threw his hat down, rode back and forth over his hat, and then drew his sword and tried to charge the startled English soldiers. His aides rode up and grabbed his reins, and the English were so surprised, they forgot to shoot at him.

At Monmouth Court House, when several American regiments broke, Charles Lee rode up and George demanded to know what was going on. Lee began to make excuses, but George cut him short, and began to curse him. Listening to an artist at swearing curse someone was a favorite pastime of the day, and many of the soldiers who were running away stopped to listen. When George dismissed Lee, he was able quickly to rally the boys, and send them back into the line. The Americans ended the day by driving off the English troops.

That ol' George . . . he was a piece of work . . .

0 Replies

jasonrest wrote:

I had a conversation with a co-worker of mine on this topic.
He grew irate at the thought of his beloved forefathers being
labeled criminals. He was unable to continue without screaming obscenities and such, so we dropped it, and vowed not to discuss it.

You labelled a co-worker's forefathers as criminals. That's always a good conversation stopper.

Perhaps next time you'd like to discuss Slavery in Modern Africa with him. Reassure him that while it's over in America, it's ongoing in Africa.

And certainly, it will be helpful for him to know that slavery existed in Africa prior to the arrival of Europeans. (same link) In fact, North African Barbary pirates were kidnapping Europeans into slavery [URL=http://]... link ... [/URL] before they realized there was money to be made in all directions.

Quote:

between 1 million and 1.25 million Europeans were captured by Barbary pirates and sold as slaves in North Africa and Ottoman Empire between the 16th and 19th centuries.[136] The coastal villages and towns of Italy, Portugal, Spain and Mediterranean islands were frequently attacked by them and long stretches of the Italian, Portuguese and Spanish coasts were almost completely abandoned by its inhabitants; after 1600 Barbary pirates occasionally entered the Atlantic and struck as far north as Iceland

0 Replies

exactly my point ehbeth, thanks

and some of their ancestors are prominent citizens now.

0 Replies

I remember hearing something about Obama's family (the white half) owning slaves- when I Googled it I found this:

Obama, McCain and Edwards all had slave owning ancestors

0 Replies

jason , you wrote :

Quote:

He grew irate at the thought of his beloved forefathers being
labeled criminals.

just for better understanding you may want to clarify your above statement .

did your co-worker think that by even raising the subject you were implying that his forefathers were "criminals" or did you actually tell him that you thought his forefathers were "criminals" ?

this may be a rather fine point but can certainly make a difference in the tone of discussion between friends/co-workers .
hbg

0 Replies

ehBeth wrote:

jasonrest wrote:
I had a conversation with a co-worker of mine on this topic.
He grew irate at the thought of his beloved forefathers being
labeled criminals. He was unable to continue without screaming obscenities and such, so we dropped it, and vowed not to discuss it.

You labelled a co-worker's forefathers as criminals. That's always a good conversation stopper.

Perhaps next time you'd like to discuss Slavery in Modern Africa with him. Reassure him that while it's over in America, it's ongoing in Africa.

And certainly, it will be helpful for him to know that slavery existed in Africa prior to the arrival of Europeans. (same link) In fact, North African Barbary pirates were kidnapping Europeans into slavery [URL=http://]... link ... [/URL] before they realized there was money to be made in all directions.

Quote:
between 1 million and 1.25 million Europeans were captured by Barbary pirates and sold as slaves in North Africa and Ottoman Empire between the 16th and 19th centuries.[136] The coastal villages and towns of Italy, Portugal, Spain and Mediterranean islands were frequently attacked by them and long stretches of the Italian, Portuguese and Spanish coasts were almost completely abandoned by its inhabitants; after 1600 Barbary pirates occasionally entered the Atlantic and struck as far north as Iceland

First, if it would please you to hear me say any African participating in this same behavior is also a criminal then....granted, they were criminals. However, Slavery in Africa was not the issue.

Were the forefathers of this country that participated in slavery not criminals?

0 Replies

jasonrest wrote:

First, if it would please you to hear me say any African participating in this same behavior is also a criminal then....granted, they were criminals. However, Slavery in Africa was not the issue.

You mean "are criminals", don't you?

~~~

And the issue was what - How to pick a fight with a co-worker?

0 Replies

hamburger wrote:

jason , you wrote :

Quote:
He grew irate at the thought of his beloved forefathers being
labeled criminals.

just for better understanding you may want to clarify your above statement .

did your co-worker think that by even raising the subject you were implying that his forefathers were "criminals" or did you actually tell him that you thought his forefathers were "criminals" ?

this may be a rather fine point but can certainly make a difference in the tone of discussion between friends/co-workers .
hbg

He was actually very gullible.
I asked him,
"Is slavery a crime, a heinous one even?".
"yes".
"Were there Presidents that participated in this same crime?"
"yes".

At the point after he answered yes, I sat speechless, staring at him.
The silence broke and he began swearing. I asked questions only.

0 Replies

ehBeth wrote:

jasonrest wrote:
First, if it would please you to hear me say any African participating in this same behavior is also a criminal then....granted, they were criminals. However, Slavery in Africa was not the issue.

You mean "are criminals", don't you?

~~~

And the issue was what - How to pick a fight with a co-worker?

The issue is should past slave-owning presidents be removed from the face of American currency. And as the posts continued, "transmogriphying" into other topics, the issue became whether or not these same great men were criminals.

Anyone that considers forced slavery a crime, (which I think most do) without anything further, assigns that label to these men without my help. And again, this applies to anyone, white, African, Hispanic etc. I am prepared to admit that slavery in Africa was a crime and those who participated were criminals. Are you prepared to do the same for these "less than perfect" men?

0 Replies

jason :
thanks for filling things in for me .

sometimes people "assume" that their "own" forefathers are being labelled as ... ... , even if that has not really been the case .
in that case it is best to stay clear of such persons because they would be unwilling to discuss such a "delicate' - to them - subject .
you'd either would get into a shouting match or would have to just shut up and walk away .

my experience over many years has been that "certain" subjects are simply not a good subject for discusion with "certain" people .
even with some of our friends we "skirt around" certain subjects because they are still friends , despite ... ...

time is a good but slow teacher , jason !
i'm still learning - or at least try to . :wink:
hbg

0 Replies

Least we forget:

During and after Roman times, the practice of slavery was common in England. Anglo-Saxons continued and expanded their slave system, sometimes in league with Norse traders. Chattel slavery of English Christians was discontinued when William of Normandy conquered England in 1066.

According to the Domesday Book census in 1086, 10% of England's population was enslaved. The trade in serfs and slaves in England was abolished in 1102. The legal force of the event is actually open to question. The Council of Westminster, a collection of nobles, issued a decree:

"Let no one hereafter presume to engage in that nefarious trade in which hitherto in England men were usually sold like brute animals."

However, the Council had no legislative powers, and no act of law was valid unless signed by the monarch, and the last form of enforced servitude (villeinage) had disappeared in Britain by the beginning of the 17th century.

Slavery resurfaced in that century as a form of punishment against Catholics. As many as 100,000 Irish men, women and children were forcibly taken to the colonies in the British West Indies and British North America as indentured servants after the Cromwellian conquest of Ireland.

In the 17th century, slavery was used as punishment by conquering English Parliament armies against native Catholics in Ireland.

0 Replies

Jason can't forget what he never knew, to wit the date the 13th Amendment was ratified >

Quote:

Amendment XIII

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

> and that it was never retroactive. His idea of presidents being "criminals" for keeping slaves prior to ratification of the 13th is plainly absurd.

0 Replies

High Seas wrote:

Jason can't forget what he never knew, to wit the date the 13th Amendment was ratified >

Quote:
Amendment XIII

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

> and that it was never retroactive. His idea of presidents being "criminals" for keeping slaves prior to ratification of the 13th is plainly absurd.

Can you with a clear conscience proclaim that because this crime was not
"officially" labeled as criminal and inhumane, by the same government that once encouraged and promoted it, then it is not?

I don't mean to be rude but that's
beyond absurd. Laughable even.
This is a "moral" crime.
It needs no official implementation.

0 Replies

jasonrest wrote:

[.........This is a "moral" crime.
It needs no official implementation.

You're free to stick with your views on "moral" crimes - law enforcement will ignore you as long as those aren't also considered crimes UNDER THE LAW. Otherwise, hope they have internet connections in your jail cell.

Btw, "moral" crimes, LOL, sounds like something dreamed up by the "Morality Police" of Saudi Arabia Smile

0 Replies

This then begs the question "What is moral?"

It meant different things at different times.

Perhaps jason should be addressing this as his opinion that it was immoral to him, albeit legal.

We view the Aztecs cutting the beating heart out of a man as immoral. They, believed they were participating in a religious ceremony.

I would not condemn every human who has ever owned a slave as immoral. Just as I would never claim that every single person that was a slave had been treated horrendously.

0 Replies

High Seas wrote:

jasonrest wrote:
[.........This is a "moral" crime.
It needs no official implementation.

You're free to stick with your views on "moral" crimes - law enforcement will ignore you as long as those aren't also considered crimes UNDER THE LAW. Otherwise, hope they have internet connections in your jail cell.

Btw, "moral" crimes, LOL, sounds like something dreamed up by the "Morality Police" of Saudi Arabia

Law enforcement?
Do you need someone to tell you that stealing is wrong?
Murder?
Enslavement?

Before the 13th amendment, was slavery inhumane and wrong?

0 Replies

high seas wrote :

Quote:

You're free to stick with your views on "moral" crimes - law enforcement will ignore you as long as those aren't also considered crimes UNDER THE LAW.

i don't believe that jason spoke about "law enforcemant" - or did i miss something ?
i don't think that jason expected law enforcement officers to be called out to investigate a "crime" .
have you never used the word "crime" or "criminal" unless someone was convicted of a crime under the law ?

Quote:

MORAL LAW

The rules of behavior an individual or a group may follow out of personal conscience and that are not necessarily part of legislated law in the United States.

Moral law is a system of guidelines for behavior. These guidelines may or may not be part of a religion, codified in written form, or legally enforceable.

For some people moral law is synonymous with the commands of a divine being. For others, moral law is a set of universal rules that should apply to everyone.

Ethical principles held primarily by the followers of Christianity have influenced the development of U.S. secular law. As a result, Christian moral law and secular law overlap in many situations. For example, murder, theft, prostitution, and other behaviors labeled immoral are also illegal.

Moral turpitude is a legal term used to describe a crime that demonstrates depravity in one's public and private life, contrary to what is accepted and customary. People convicted of this crime can be disqualified from government office, lose their license to practice law, or be deported (in the case of immigrants).

MORAL LAW

0 Replies

hello....? (tapping on mike).....is this thing on?

obviously, a thing may be moral and illegal, or visa-versa.

the question is, because we at this precise time hold something immoral, does that mean it has always been so?

What, are we so enlightened today that we can be armchair morality police for all ages?

At the time of Washington, Jefferson, et al, they was no more consensus as to whether slavery was immoral, than the issue of abortion, or which coffee at starbucks tastes the best, or if they all suck, today.

0 Replies

Should slave owners be removed from the dollar bill?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know