Florida schools now teaching students that slavery brought "personal benefit" to Black people

[reason10]

17 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

 

I doubt that you can do this but can you answer the following question with a yes or no? Not one single other character is needed

Would you ever willingly opt to be a slave? 

as always, you go off into left field.. 

I'm just answering and discussing the item you presented. If it's too complicated, that's your problem.

As far as anyone willingly opting to be a slave, the answer to that has an interesting history. The closest thing to voluntary slavery would be the INDENTURED SERVANT program, which existed in British America until the late 18th Century. It was done by contract, and it is the closest thing to working for no pay.

Of course, there are prison sentences carrying the label "at hard labor" which you could define as slavery, although it would be more accurate to calling it PAYING ONE'S DEBT TO SOCIETY. Has a nicer ring to it.

As far  as people who refuse to be slaves, one would have to look no further than the American Indian, a species of human that would DIE rather than be a slave.

As far as my personal choice to be a slave, that's just an ignorant an uneducated question. I was lucky to be born in the greatest country of all time. I was lucky to have parents who gave me a very strong work ethic. I'm lucky to live in Florida, the greatest economy and best educated state in the union. So I won't work for nothing, (unless it's a charity).

 

 

[impartialobserver]

32 minutes ago, reason10 said:

as always, you go off into left field.. 

I'm just answering and discussing the item you presented. If it's too complicated, that's your problem.

As far as anyone willingly opting to be a slave, the answer to that has an interesting history. The closest thing to voluntary slavery would be the INDENTURED SERVANT program, which existed in British America until the late 18th Century. It was done by contract, and it is the closest thing to working for no pay.

Of course, there are prison sentences carrying the label "at hard labor" which you could define as slavery, although it would be more accurate to calling it PAYING ONE'S DEBT TO SOCIETY. Has a nicer ring to it.

As far  as people who refuse to be slaves, one would have to look no further than the American Indian, a species of human that would DIE rather than be a slave.

As far as my personal choice to be a slave, that's just an ignorant an uneducated question. I was lucky to be born in the greatest country of all time. I was lucky to have parents who gave me a very strong work ethic. I'm lucky to live in Florida, the greatest economy and best educated state in the union. So I won't work for nothing, (unless it's a charity).

 

 

So as expected... you can't answer a yes/no questions with a yes/no answer. That shows how insecure you are. No need to dress up the answer with extra stuff when the one word will do the job. 

[Aristides]

8 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

One could think that being a slave and therefore being forced to live in a more modern civilization (1820's Uganda compared to the USA) is superior to being left in the jungle. However, no one would ever opt for being a slave even if from an economic/material standpoint one is in a better situation. 

How is a slave better off economically or materially?

[impartialobserver]

13 hours ago, Aristides said:

How is a slave better off economically or materially?

Had they stayed in Uganda (just an example), they are most likely not exposed to any type of written language, modern machinery, or new languages. One of the reasons that sub-saharan africa stayed behind the times was its lack of exposure to other nations/races. 

[Aristides]

36 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Had they stayed in Uganda (just an example), they are most likely not exposed to any type of written language, modern machinery, or new languages. One of the reasons that sub-saharan africa stayed behind the times was its lack of exposure to other nations/races. 

Yes, we capture them, tear them away from their families and put them on ships like this, on which a good percentage of them won't survive the passage, or might be thrown overboard in chains to get rid of the evidence if intercepted by an anti slavery patrol.

 

s

Then sell them to the highest bidder who has control over life and death for their whole lives. If they have families as slaves, those members can be sold off, never to be seen again. But we did them a favour because Massa taught them to pick cotton, operate a plow, shoe a horse or cook and clean for the Massa. They should have paid for the privilege.

What makes you think slaves were taught to read and write unless it was a skill they needed to serve the Massa? Otherwise, why does a slave need the ability to read and write?

Edited August 3, 2023 by Aristides

[impartialobserver]

3 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Yes, we capture them, tear them away from their families and put them on ships like this, on which a good percentage of them won't survive the passage, or might be thrown overboard in chains to get rid of the evidence if intercepted by an anti slavery patrol.

 

s

Then sell them to the highest bidder who has control over life and death for their whole lives. If they have families as slaves, those members can be sold off, never to be seen again. But we did them a favour because Massa taught them to pick cotton, operate a plow, shoe a horse or cook and clean for the Massa. They should have paid for the privilege.

What makes you think slaves were taught to read and write unless it was a skill they needed to serve the Massa? Otherwise, why does a slave need the ability to read and write?

Lets be clear.. I do not buy into this logic that slaves lives were made better by slavery. My point is that even if they did gain some skills/knowledge.... human nature precludes this because no one would willingly opt for slavery no matter the potential benefits. 

[Aristides]

31 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Lets be clear.. I do not buy into this logic that slaves lives were made better by slavery. My point is that even if they did gain some skills/knowledge.... human nature precludes this because no one would willingly opt for slavery no matter the potential benefits. 

Fair enough, but it is laughable to assert that more than a very small minority actually benefited from slavery.

[impartialobserver]

Just now, Aristides said:

Fair enough, but it is laughable to assert that more than a very small minority actually benefited from slavery.

what is even more laughable is that those who assert this.. when asked if they would ever willingly opt to be a slave can never actually answer the question. They flail like a worm on a hook.. So if there are benefits to being a slave (no, I do not agree) then why would you not opt for it?

[impartialobserver]

Not willingly opting to be a slave is much the same as not willingly accepting being ruled by an outsider. The first is individual.. the second is group but same mindset. A lot of nations in South America and Africa were economically in better shape when ruled by Europeans so why want independence and therefore economic decline? Simple.. humans like to be in control of their own affairs.