Is Racial Segregation really a human rights Violation?

A serious studyof history shows that you are talking through your trousers, like all white nationalists. Slaves were generally war captives forcibly resettled to pacify conquered areas and provide cheap farm labor, just like the Romans did.

 

Cow cookies. They helped build this nation. They deserve a piece of the action. No other country owes our black citizens anything.

And then there is the fact that most of us think you are just being a punk and a sociopath and need to learn to live in a world that does not revolve around your superstitions and insecurities.

Dumb idea 150 years ago, dumb idea now.

 

The disproportionate welfare payments to blacks outweighs the total value of their slavery farm work by several orders of magnitude every year.

 

Truth is that most slaves were sold by black slavers to Europeans , often their kings.

 

really?....your source for this interesting revelation, and what about the numbers for the white population on welfare?

 

I calculated it.

 

That makes it easy to prove; just show the calculations.​

 

I don't have them to hand. Look it up. The total value of the cotton and other things produced under slavery. It's a fraction of the disproportionate welfare money blacks receive each year. That is the difference between what it would be if blacks and whites received equal proportions.

http://www.ironbarkresources.com/slaves/whiteslaves02.htm

 

Which is to say that you pulled it out of your butt.

 

Current market value with inflation and interest? And 'other things'... like railroads, farms, canals, buildings, businesses, and a share of the profit produced by each with interest and inflation. Dunno, seems like a challenging calculation. Let me know when you have it on hand. It's not reasonable for you to ask us to take your word for it.​

 

Black slaves did not do much other than work in agriculture. They didn't "build America". Obviously it was adjusted for inflation. I'll do it again sometime, can't be bothered now.

 

most of the government buildings in Washington, D.C. were built using slave labor in the construction trades. Do learn some US history. I would suggest using something other than Stormfront-approved sources.

 

50 to 100 slaves worked on the project each year (source), in unskilled roles. Out of several hundred thousand slaves in the US at the time, I don't think you've made your case that slaves did much other than work in agriculture.

 

The blog you source talks about 50-100 slaves each year -- to build just the white house and capital building. While those two buildings are historically significant, that was hardly the only contribution built with slave labor.

Outside the area of non-plantation domestic slavery their was a wealth of other occupations for slaves to engage. Many masters chose to employ their slaves in more profitable ways, thus excluding many male slaves from household employment (this accounted for the shortage of servants). Consequently, many slaves were put to work in the areas of industry, manufacturing and craftsmanship. Additionally, large number of slaves were utilized by municipalities and business corporations who aimed to further enhance their productivity.

Slaves were always vital to the growth of industry, such as the renowned tobacco and iron industries of Richmond. The tobacco industry depended almost single handedly on slave labor, which accounted for nearly all of the industry’s skilled and unskilled work. All of the tobacco related products to leave the factories were processed by slave workers. The iron industry, especially in Richmond, was also very slave-dependent. In this industry, many blacks managed to show off their skills in "pudding, heating, and rolling as well as the usual common tasks" (Wade 34). As slave labor flourished in the tobacco and iron industries, so did the industries themselves. Most importantly, black slaves were able to show that they were just as apt for skilled industrial work as anyone else.

Industry was not the only non-domestic work performed by slaves. A wide variety of manual occupations were also undertaken by the slave population. Among these employments were skilled slaves working as carpenters, blacksmiths, masons, shoemakers, cooks, and mechanics, to name a few. Also worth mentioning is that many slaves helped propagate the Transportation Revolution of the 1800s through extensive railroad and canal building. Masses of slaves called "gangs" proved to be the most effective method of work in canal/railroad construction process. As slaves began work on an Alabama project, the New Orleans Daily Crescent best explained the popular approval of slave labor by saying: "This is the way to build railroads" (Wade 34).

Publicly employed slaves also became rather common, as they performed various tasks for southern municipalities. Such slaves "graded, paved, and cleaned streets, built bridges, collected garbage, dug sewers and generally provided the muscle for city projects" (Wade 44). (*)

Wade, Richard C., Slavery in the Cities: The South 1820-1860. New York: Oxford University Press, 1964.
​

​

 

I guess people really need to learn their history before posting and making themselves look silly....

 

You haven't disproved anything I've said. I never denied some slaves worked in construction and industry. My assertion was that most of them worked in agriculture, and that is where most of the wealth of the colonies was generated. Furthermore, that turned out to be a tiny fraction of the money we waste on blacks each year. You have refuted none of this. It is you that looks silly.

 

silly?....nothing is more silly than your argument and state of denial. Have a nice day.

 

I think if we continue to work on pulling down the walls of ignorance and discrimination then real improvements can be made.

 

Racial segregation is stupid, immoral and, of course, totally unpopular. Its a dead idea, politically speaking.

 

Except for the Jews.

In addition, those who have been most active in promoting "equality", have been Jews.

Funny that, isn't it?

 

How can you be so confused to imply that de segregation improves "diversity"?
Each race has its' own culture and heritage and by mixing them all up you destroy both; the race and their culture.

di·ver·si·ty
   [dih-vur-si-tee, dahy-] Show IPA
noun, plural di·ver·si·ties.
1.
the state or fact of being diverse; difference; unlikeness.
2.
variety; multiformity.

True "diversity" celebrates and encourages the differences. Variety is a good thing.
Latinos celebrate their heritage and culture and everything is fine.
Negroes celebrate their culture and heritage and everything is fine.
If white people try to celebrate and preserve their heritage, culture, laws and history....they are "racists".

"Diversity" has become a code word justifying anti white behavior.

 

I am gong to try to explain it slowly so you can understand....there is no problem with white people celebrating their heritage, culture, etc. , it's when some of them try to show their superiority and that the other races are beneath them that people have a problem with.

but, just by you using the term "negro" says everything i need to know about your train of thought.

 

Avoiding the topic, changing the subject and being unable to refute the premise (when backed into a corner by a simple, truthful, on topic statement) reveals a lot about you also, champ.

"Negro" is used on the U.S. census form as one of the choices for "race", you know.

EDIT;
You edited your post and included this;

I'll reply that we were talking about "diversity" and how it destroys uniqueness and limits variety....Your condescending tone noted and disregarded.
Diversity IS good...but not the new "definition" of the word invented by anti whites.

 

YOU brought up the weak claim that it was unfair for white people to celebrate their heritage, I simply explained that it is not about the heritage, it is about the "claim of superiority"

 

Who claimed "superiority"? I must have missed that post?