-->
@zedvictor4
--> @ShilaYep, we have reached an agreement.
You mean Athias’s post was addressed and corrected by Shila.
why slavery is good
Posts
Total:
80
-->
@Shila
You mean Athias’s post was addressed and corrected by Shila.
You didn't correct anything. You merely pointed out the discreet options in zedvictor's use in "or." I focused on one of them.
-->
@Athias
zedvictor4: Slavery might or not be better for the slave.Athias: If a slave wants to be a slave, then a slave is not a slave because the capacity to which one is a slave is dictated by a slave, which contradicts the concept of being a slave. So when you state, "better," "better" for whom?
You were corrected by Shila that zedvictor4 already said. “Slavery might or not be better for the slave.”
But you did not read his post correctly and asked him, “So when you state, "better," "better" for whom?”
Already stated in zedvictor4’s post. Slavery might or not be better for the slave.
-->
@Shila
You were corrected by Shila that zedvictor4 already said. “Slavery might or not be better for the slave.”But you did not read his post correctly and asked him, “So when you state, "better," "better" for whom?”Already stated in zedvictor4’s post. Slavery might or not be better for the slave
Okay, Shila.
-->
@Athias
--> @ShilaYou were corrected by Shila that zedvictor4 already said. “Slavery might or not be better for the slave.”But you did not read his post correctly and asked him, “So when you state, "better," "better" for whom?”Already stated in zedvictor4’s post. Slavery might or not be better for the slaveOkay, Shila.
Now that your question has been answered you can move on to the main discussion. Why slavery is good.
-->
@Shila
If there is a purpose to everything.
Then slavery is a factor of that process.
Younger generations are now slaves to technology, and the majority just accept this.
Slavery is/was just a necessity relative to human development.
Or everything is completely pointless, and nothing really matters anyway.
Perhaps the asteroid is already on its way.
Isn't it just a case of people thinking about stuff unnecessarily.
Though if we didn't have the power to think about stuff, we wouldn't have invented slavery or the smartphone.
But we did.
And so?
"primitive life"? no
please consider how our lives have been dealing with more stress after modernization. We're mostly going against our natural purposes, we're not born to work 8 hours a day 24/7 sitting in an office chair. We're built to scavange berries, hunt rabbits and make babies in a decent cave.
i do not mean primitive life is better than modern life. modern life has provided a lot of escape for some people. Originally, the disabled weren't even able to survive in the wild and were usually abandoned. Women gained rights starting in the 20th century; a lot of them were treated more or less like a sort of a pet animal before that
primitive life and modernization both has its ups and downs. we can't say that we got better, but neither we can say we are taking steps backwards. I think humanity is going somewhere, lol
and the white weren't even there for the black's prosperity in the first place. It wasn't their purpose. It just "happened" to turn out that black people are now a part of modern lives, but we can't say the white raiding them is what made them able to be here. The blacks themselves fought for their own rights.
51 days later
-->
@Vici
if the europeans didn't come and swoop into the land of the indigenous, the indigenous would still be in their primitive lives without medicine, security of housing, nutritious food etc.
I thought the general consensus was that the Indigenous people of North America did not live primitive lives and were very advanced; looking after the land, themselves and the community well. It is very common for white settlers to disrespect and disregard Indigenous people's efforts and livelihood because it is different to their own. Take a look at Indigenous Australians. They were the oldest civilisation on Earth, were healthy, looked after the land and have rich culture but the British did not accept their way of living as 'civilised'. They even marked the land as 'uninhabited' because there were no fences or roads to mark land and that is what the British considered to make a civilisation, when Indigenous people had been living there for thousands of years. Long story short, Indigenous people did not need Europeans. They just say that to justify the hundreds of years of oppression and genocide.
-->
@BigBuffMan
Stuff happens BigBuffMan.
It's now, now, and what is, is.
And stuff will continue to happen and become stuff that happened.
And indigenes are only settlers, relative to a cherrypicked moment in time.
And then others came and settled.
And people continue to come and settle.
We are either one species or not.
And demarcation lines on maps are just that.
Yearning for the good old days is futile.
-->
@zedvictor4
If only it were that simple. If we look at North America these people were massacred. It is not a matter of the British just 'settling' they murdered countless women, men and children, actively worked to erase their languages and culture, stole their children and raped countless more. The way you describe it is as if they handed the land over peacefully. These people died for their land, their culture, their children, their families.
The suffering did not end there. Most reservations across the US have limited access to electricity, running water, education, health care, nutritious food, etc because of lack of government funding. Life expectancy is also significantly lower than their non-Indigenous counterparts. For example, at the Pine Ridge Reservation the life expectancy for women is 52 years and men is 48 years (https://indianyouth.org/american-indian-life/#:~:text=Life%20expectancy%20on%20the%20Pine,rate%20in%20the%20United%20States.) Countless Indigenous women and young girls also go missing every year and police and justice systems fail to investigate (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/lack-awareness-data-hinders-cases-missing-murdered-native-american-women-n1235233). This is in the US alone; lest us forget Australia, the Aztecs, India, New Zealand, etc.
Even without these facts, you have no right to say 'stuff matters' if you were never the victim of these horrendous acts. You cannot forgive the perpetrator on the behalf of others.
-->
@BigBuffMan
The perpetrators are long since dead, so not forgiving them is more than a tad futile.
And similarly, British is as British does, an amalgamation of various Europeans and beyond, established in the 1700's.
And for centuries, previous inhabitants of the Islands of Britain were enslaved and massacred by various invaders/settlers.
Stuff happened/happens, as I said.
And you choose to focus on one point of North American history, where "The British" and various other European amalgamations, such as the French and the Spanish invaded/settled and supressed previous settlers.
And so the United States of America was established, and therefore the current plight of these previous settlers is no longer the remit of the latter day amalgamated British.
And if you've visited Britain recently you would have noticed that the latter day British are an eclectic mix, far removed from the 1700's.
41 days later
-->
@Vici
1. Africa had thriving societies and kingdoms that actually worked as the basis for trade with Europe. This was the triangular trade, after all, and they armed coastal kingdoms to do slave raids on kingdoms further inland.
2. The industrial revolution happened in England before the rest of the world because of a series of factors. This is what gave the benefit of modern technology, though this happened after the abolishment of slavery, so the timeline being suggested here doesn't even make sense.
72 days later
Why not? .. it was a civil war and some were not convinced, so .. why not I ask again , why not ..
-->
@WindowsUser34
I picture you stood defiant on a mound looking majestically skyward.
Or majestically on a mound looking defiantly skyward.
Why I ask again, why not...
-->
@Vici
THIS IS NOT MY ARGUMENT. THIS IS NOT. I READ THIS FROM THIS GUY NAMED RICHARD SPENCER. I AM BLACK (hence me having the n word pass) AND HATED SLAVERY.the argument is like this. if the europeans didn't come and swoop into the land of the indigenous, the indigenous would still be in their primitive lives without medicine, security of housing, nutritious food etc. but since the european boys came, even tho they enslaved some of them, OVER ALL, we can see that black people live better lives than they did 500. years ago.DONT CANCEL ME, IM JUST A PUPPET FOR RICHARD SPENCER. IM JUST SAYING HIS ARGUMENT. IM NOT A RIGHT WINGER, I VOTED FOR BERNIE SANDERS
Firstly, I'm not sure Richard Spencer ever said this (wouldn't mind a link).
Secondly, Richard Spencer has rebranded as a far more moderate Christian, and thus wouldn't even agree with this statement anyway (if he did say it).
Thirdly, there are great moral/ethical issues with slavery (i.e. the concept of owning someone without their consent). Even if they ended up better than they would have been in Africa (which has been argued before on this site United States slaves were, overall, treated quite well (debateart.com) ), that wouldn't necessarily excuse it ethically/morally.
Lastly, this line of 'white savior' reasoning has been disastrous for White countries. White nationalists, who actually think about the consequences of slavery, will quickly realize that slavery has flooded their countries with different human races, and hence slowly but surely undermined White nations with different racial interests. Hence, slavery was bad for the host White nations.
There's no reason for anyone to agree that slavery was a good thing, and even if the slaves were materially better off, that came at the cost of some seriously questionable ethical/moral decisions.
Lastly, this line of 'white savior' reasoning has been disastrous for White countries.
And yet even some blacks realize just how whites saved those who were brought to America (less than 336k), who do far better than those taken to the Carribean and South America (over 10.7 million) during the Atlantic Slave Trade.
These are but two examples, I can give plenty more.
-->
@TWS1405_2
Lastly, this line of 'white savior' reasoning has been disastrous for White countries.And yet even some blacks realize just how whites saved those who were brought to America (less than 336k), who do far better than those taken to the Carribean and South America (over 10.7 million) during the Atlantic Slave Trade.These are but two examples, I can give plenty more.
Materially (if we ignore the large moral issue with slavery for a second), yes, these slaves did quite well.
Without going into detail, Black slaves learned to speak English, were fed quite well, weren't worked particularly hard and weren't brutally beaten (for the most part).
-->
@Kaitlyn
The past is history.
Either forget it.
Or keep raking s**t.
Probably depends upon which is the most lucrative.
That and the human propensity for raking s**t.
For the want of something to occupy their limited minds with in response to their own short lived insecurities and universal worth or worthlessness.
And then there are cleverer people who probably need to get on with doing clever stuff.
Their minds occupied with the necessity of getting on with clever stuff.
In the meantime give the masses smartphones.
Head down and drool at the digital wonder captured on that little screen.
Tarts and trannies alike in their glorious underwear and marvellous tattoos.
What it is to be human, hey Kaitlyn.
slavery is good because you turn on the competitive spirit for basic needs.
-->
@grimmhorizons
How do you mean?
-->
@Lemming
@grimmhorizons
I would suggest that a conscious entity cannot turn innate demand for basic needs on or off.
But can make conscious decisions relative to their predicament.
As I probably stated previously, slavery was essential to human social and intellectual development.
Though we have a tendency these days to regard slavery only as Nasty Old Whites with big boats and poor old blacks in shackles.
Whereas slavery has been around ever since hominids came up with the idea.
Probably somewhere in Africa.
-->
@zedvictor4
What do you mean by innate basic needs?
Of slavery, jah, I'd agree, been around a long time, many places.
-->
@Lemming
The needs of survival.
Dictated by the sub-conscious or inherited information.
So for example, without thinking we know that we are hungry or thirsty or cold or need to procreate.
One cannot turn these bodily signals on and off at will.
We can ignore them, but they never go away.
-->
@zedvictor4
Well, I 'would think we might tend to die if we ignored them 'all the time,
Or were to turn them off permanently.
"Alexander’s experiments, in the 1970s, have come to be called the “Rat Park.1 Researchers had already proved that when rats were placed in a cage, all alone, with no other community of rats, and offered two water bottles-one filled with water and the other with heroin or cocaine-the rats would repetitively drink from the drug-laced bottles until they all overdosed and died. Like pigeons pressing a pleasure lever, they were relentless, until their bodies and brains were overcome, and they died."
Not that I encourage animal experimentation,
But research 'already done is interesting.
Though grimmhorizon's meaning is till unclear to me.
Did some just yell out ,
▪○°•¤▪○°•¤▪○°•¤ 《SEX SLAVES》 WITH TWO AGREEABLE PARTIES . ▪○●°•▪○●°•▪▪○●°•▪○●
?
No but.
The main reason why slavery is so so good is because.
I got a shop that sells slaves by the sea shore.
And it just so happens,, this week you can get 20% off. All ( Male slaves aged 17 to 27 )
HOLD ON.
☆☆☆☆☆ ( Female slaves fetch more money and get "payed" more. ) ☆☆☆☆☆
Look I'm not sure this is fair.
( MALE Picking fruits for a 6 day week )
pays on avrage / approximately the same asssss.
( FEMALE 2 hours , maybe 3 hours max ) of what the ladies call , ( "just inside work" ),
Or more commonly referred to as.
( it was just "inside" work. Thats all it was , i promise, i love you babe )
so im guessing that would be like dusting and polishing and cutlery cleaning .
But thats ummmm, some kind of injustice hey ?
Women getting more then us..
Slavery may infact need to be regulated.
We need to look into that.
I got like umm.
2 Blue ones.
1 fluorescent orange.
i have a real nice 1 that i did in a expensive 2-pac red car paint.
I even painted one with green fence paint once.
The reasons for doing this is absolutely none of you guys business whatsoever.
I mean.
There my slaves and I'll paint em any color i like.
-->
@Lemming
Hmmmm.
Perhaps that just tells us about the addictive quality of heroin and how it affects grey matter.
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
I would splash out on the more expensive type and massage them with baby oil, rather than paint them.
After they had cooked my dinner.
-->
@zedvictor4
Like i said.
It aint None of you business.
Move on.
The red one did come up really nice like but.
Fuck hang on .
One sentence i got ( come up nice like but )
My bad
But you not what i mean Zed
Especially with that gloss finish,
Fuk again last sentence. No . Zed Im not talking about slaves from finland with a gloss coat
Move on.
-->
@zedvictor4
Ok yeah , you win zed , and now im thinking about it. Good on ya.
Hey What about that real experience paint that goes from green to gold and purple and that.
Wow, picture it.
A slave would look real flashy in that color. ( there is heaps of different ya average slave, hey ZED ? )
Cover that with like, four maybe five coats of that,
3 coats of gloss.
Balla.