You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
[–]ardvarcus0 points
48 points
48 points
(+48|-0)
ago
Slavery is always a mistake ... for the enslavers. It forces a superior race to interact with an inferior race. What happens? The inferior race is elevated, and the superior race is degraded.
[+]varialus0 points0 points0 points
ago
(edited ago)
[–]varialus0 points
0 points
0 points
(+0|-0)
ago
(edited ago)
What about whites enslaving whites? Or rather, what if people faced certain death for some reason and there was so much competition of who might be saved by the masters, who are genetically equivalent, that the would be slaves offered themselves, their possessions, and their descendants up willingly, that they might come under the eternal watchful eye of those who have wherewith to save them. Then would slavery be alright? The master would be all like, well, I don't really agree with slavery in general, but you're very persuasive and you run a hard bargain. Ok, ok, you can be my slave. Come along now. :-)
[–]11807487?0 points
5 points
5 points
(+5|-0)
ago
In the most general terms, something like this happened in the Middle Ages in Europe. However, they weren't slaves they were serfs. They and their descendants were pledged to be attached to the land, not owned by a specific person. There was a whole ceremony where people would renounce their freedom. The biggest holders of serfs were probably monasteries in many cases.
Serfs did have rights and could, for example, inherit. And often their overlords made sure their rights were respected, in part because Christianity created an atmosphere where the rich were expected to look after the poor (a type of eeeevil paternalism). Also because of the Christian take care of your brother thing, if you were rich enough to and didn't, all the other nobles would look at you askance and talk shit behind your back.
No one will talk about different forms of bondage anymore but history classes should really be teaching this stuff in more detail. Once you understand these social strata and forms of labor, everything else about the society starts to make more sense. The only thing they're allowed to say, even at the university undergraduate level, is that African plantation slavery was the worst and most horrifying slavery system ever devised. Which is not even remotely true, the Spartans among other groups treated slaves extremely brutally. But no one can damage the myth.
[–]AristotleCLONE4 points
-4 points
0 points
(+0|-4)
ago
(edited ago)
This is a nonsensical statement.
That's considering the facts that 1)no one forced our Caucasoid forefathers to purchase negros as, property, then religiously ejaculate into the negro slaves' vagina to create lightskinned negros. Include the reality that 2)by 1840, negro's slave labor was responsible for 65% of the exports this nation output.
Now, go use deductive reasoning, and then you'll easily see how 'twas negros who built this nation and not us Caucasoids.
This is a nonsensical claim.
No proof of your facts and pulling numbers out of your ass. I know you fantasize about being a white slave owner and fucking your farm equipment, but please keep it to yourself.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] ardvarcus 0 points 48 points 48 points (+48|-0) ago
Slavery is always a mistake ... for the enslavers. It forces a superior race to interact with an inferior race. What happens? The inferior race is elevated, and the superior race is degraded.
[–] varialus ago (edited ago)
What about whites enslaving whites? Or rather, what if people faced certain death for some reason and there was so much competition of who might be saved by the masters, who are genetically equivalent, that the would be slaves offered themselves, their possessions, and their descendants up willingly, that they might come under the eternal watchful eye of those who have wherewith to save them. Then would slavery be alright? The master would be all like, well, I don't really agree with slavery in general, but you're very persuasive and you run a hard bargain. Ok, ok, you can be my slave. Come along now. :-)
[–] 11807487? 0 points 5 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago
In the most general terms, something like this happened in the Middle Ages in Europe. However, they weren't slaves they were serfs. They and their descendants were pledged to be attached to the land, not owned by a specific person. There was a whole ceremony where people would renounce their freedom. The biggest holders of serfs were probably monasteries in many cases.
Serfs did have rights and could, for example, inherit. And often their overlords made sure their rights were respected, in part because Christianity created an atmosphere where the rich were expected to look after the poor (a type of eeeevil paternalism). Also because of the Christian take care of your brother thing, if you were rich enough to and didn't, all the other nobles would look at you askance and talk shit behind your back.
No one will talk about different forms of bondage anymore but history classes should really be teaching this stuff in more detail. Once you understand these social strata and forms of labor, everything else about the society starts to make more sense. The only thing they're allowed to say, even at the university undergraduate level, is that African plantation slavery was the worst and most horrifying slavery system ever devised. Which is not even remotely true, the Spartans among other groups treated slaves extremely brutally. But no one can damage the myth.
[–] i_scream_trucks 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I think they call that Sonderkommando
[–] AristotleCLONE 4 points -4 points 0 points (+0|-4) ago (edited ago)
This is a nonsensical statement.
That's considering the facts that 1)no one forced our Caucasoid forefathers to purchase negros as, property, then religiously ejaculate into the negro slaves' vagina to create lightskinned negros. Include the reality that 2)by 1840, negro's slave labor was responsible for 65% of the exports this nation output.
Now, go use deductive reasoning, and then you'll easily see how 'twas negros who built this nation and not us Caucasoids.
[–] NiggerJusticeWarrior 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
This is a nonsensical claim. No proof of your facts and pulling numbers out of your ass. I know you fantasize about being a white slave owner and fucking your farm equipment, but please keep it to yourself.
[–] Bullinamarket_ ago (edited ago)
3% of the population was responsible for 65% of exports? Sheeeeiit.