Less the 2% of American whites owned slaves?

"Jim Crow was alive and kicking in 2012."

Taxcutter says:
Where?

 

"...there are still many employers who won't hire blacks for any jobs..."

Taxcutter says:
After a half-century of mad-dog federal enforcement, that seems unlikely. Got evidence?



"...there are still places where racial discrimination is practiced. "

Taxcutter says:
Everywhere Affirmative Action applies.

 

doesn't mean it was legal like it was in America for so long

 

Feigning ignorance is a weak tactic.
Stop embarrassing yourself.
Here is just one of several voter suppression tactics tried by the cons in 2012:

The truth is that the cons tried to ram through hundreds of Jim Crow laws in the run-up to the 2012 election in many states in order to disenfranchise minorities, the poor and the young- all groups that tend to vote democratic.
The fact that you people failed to rig the system is a testament to the dearth of support that there is in the country for your sick right-wing ideology.
You can't hide from the facts or the truth of what right-wingers are really all about.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/waymo...-laws-suppression-and-equality_b_1898613.html

 

6 pages later and I'm still trying to figure out the point of the thread. That 2% number is technically inaccurate, by the way.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, yes being white in American makes your life a little easier. You don't have to prove that you aren't a threat, or that you're capable of doing a task.

 

What evidence do you have that the 2% number is inaccurate, other than your need to believe it is so?

 

Slavery was illegal in most states, and most whites couldn't afford slaves, but wanted to become slave owners. It also depends on the time period. Slavery was starting to lose its profitability toward the beginnings of the Civil War anyway. Either way, 2% is technically inaccurate, and downplays, once again, the effects of slavery. Reading a book, any book would help ya'll understand this..

 

Other than your personal opinion that the laws were enacted in order to disenfranchise minorities, do you have even a shred of evidence?

 

Soooooo its just your need to believe it is so. As I suspected.

 

Okie Dokie I'll leave you to your ignorance. Have a great spring break..

 

Then why are you playing the 'white victim' card here?

Do we applaud a man when he stops beating his wife?

The United States allowed a horrible practice of the slavery of human beings until we stopped allowing it. Slavery is a fact of our history, and a blemish on our nation- but it wasnt' my fault- and I feel no guilt about it- no more than I feel 'guilt' about Japanese American internment camps. Nations make mistakes- our country made one and eventually corrected it.

You are the one who started this thread about race- you are the one who are complaining about victims.

Frankly your entire thesis seems mostly about justifying slavery and I am not buying it.

 

Lololol! You've incorrecty identified intelligence as the source of the silly thoughts bouncing around in your head

 

I would feel guilty about believing the notion that the civil war was about slavery.

 

???? Odd statement. Of course it was about slavery. But for slavery and the norths opposition to it the we wouldnt of had the souths secession from the union.

 

Lets not forget blacks in Africa were the ones who sold their own people as slaves to whites. Maybe if they told them all to go to %$&#*# as soon as they got off the boat, there wouldn't have been a problem. Blacks wouldn't have had to worry about being slaves in America?

And Jews were slaves for 1000s of years. I'm certainly not guilty. My ancestors came from Germany and Poland. My people were burned in ovens, almost wiped out. I feel no empathy for any other race's problems, because they pale in comparison as far as I'm concerned. The difference is, Jews thrived and prospered greater than basically any other. THAT's something to be proud of.

 

THATS what we love to hear. someone who has seen immense suffering and then turns around and states that they feel no empathy for the immense suffering of others!! hahahahahahahaahahahah

 

wuht...

 

More correctly it was about States Rights, in particular the right of states to allow slavery. Read the articles of succession of the Southern States

South Carolina

Virginia

Texas

Clearly the issue of Slavery was a paramount reason for succession.

here is a link to the ordinances of succession of the Southern States

 

wtf i aint playing no victim and certainly justifying it. Im saying im very surprised its only 2% of whites in America that owned slaves, they way you guys carry on about throwing guilt on EVERY white person i wouldve thought it much higher.

No we dont applaud a man if he stops beating his wife, but if a group of people stop all men beating women then they've achieved something great that imo is worthy.

Frankly your entire thesis seems mostly about blaming slavery on white Europeans and ONLY them and I am not buying it.

 

Good luck getting credit for anything good white people have ever done. As far as conventional wisdom is concerned, we're only as good as our worst deeds. Of course if we try to apply this same logic to anyone else......



So much for equality.

 

Doh ^^ certainly NOT justifying it

 

The South was quite correct, the Federal government had no constitutional authority to force them into abandoning slavery.

The biggest causality of the civil war was the idea that the United States was a compact of states rather than a unitary government.

This said, obviously the South was wrong in policy and its citizens should have changed their minds, but there's no excuse for unconstitutional abuses of power, no matter how just the cause.

This example has nothing to do with the slavery/civil war issue.

Obama has been President for 5 years, there are very few people who are shocked at a black President, but are outraged at his policies.

 

Can't follow your logic. First because it can be about both, and second because the more general(states rights) is not more correct than the "particular"(continuation of slavery)

 

Yes, I'm aware of the politically correct version of the causes of the Civil War which every schoolchild learns in his government-run school.

Right there you have contradicted yourself. It wasn't, you write, slavery that was the cause of the war, it was the secession, or, more appropriately, the opposition of some to the secession of the south. Slavery, nor the ending of it, did not necessitate war. Secession did not necessitate war, either.

 

It was about political and economic hegemony. The North did not fight a war to free black people. Only school children believe that.