On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 11:28:57 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 10:01:15 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/17/18 9:25 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 08:11:36 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/17/18 2:57 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 21:54:58 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 9:05 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:46:12 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 2:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 09:11:43 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/16/18 12:20 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 02:39:13 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote:

And it was the British who brought a lot of the slaves to America. And
the Carib. They only freed them in England, not in any colonies.

Make that pretty much all the slaves. 18 years after we kicked the
British out the congress passed a low barring any more importation of
slaves. Most were already here before 1776, brought here on British
ships.


Portugal, England, Spain, France, the Netherlands, among other European
nations, engaged in bringing slaves to the "New World." The Portuguese
were the largest slave traders.

Slaves were brought here throughout much of the 19th Century.

Not legally, after 180

There are estimates that twelve to fifteen million Africans were brought
over as slaves, but many died in the transit. Their survivors lived in
slavery in this country beyond the Civil War, even though they were
emancipated. There are ways to enslave people without calling them slaves.

That gets us back to my contention that the civil war was unnecessary.
Perhaps if slavery was ended in a way that did not cost us 600,000
lives and destroy half of the country, the transition might have been
faster and less contentious. At least you admit the war did not make
the slaves equal. The process took 150 years, just to get where we are
now.


I see you are still promoting the idea that slavery was an ok thing. If
the former slaves are not equal, it is the fault of whitey.

I never said it was OK. I just said that the war was not the best way
to resolve the issue and you are simply proving the futility of that
method.


It wasn't futile; it was necessary. How many more generations of slavery
would have been acceptable to you and the rest of you white conservatives?

You are the one who said "Their survivors lived in slavery in this
country beyond the Civil War, even though they were emancipated"

How many generations was that?



The slavery to which I was referring was no longer the actual
slavery...you didn't perceive that?
White racism towards people of color in this country will never die out.
The actual slavery in the south would not have ended sans the Civil War.

Slavery has ended in countries throughout the former British colonies
and we are the only one that think we needed a devastating war to do
it.
I thought you were against war. You seem to think economic pressures
are all we need to cure all of the world's ills but this one.
The reality is that slavery was economically based and could have been
brought down with economic pressure. If slave produced goods were no
longer accepted in trade with the north and the rest of the civilized
world, slavery would have ended very fast.


Oh, yeah...that free market bull****. Loonytarianism.

===

I guess you've chosen to ignore the fact that legalized slavery did
end everywhere else around the world without fighting any wars? And
free market economics is far from loony; it's proven in fact. Just
look at what centralized planning did for the old Soviet Union and
Cuba for example.

Harry thinks Cuba is a worker's paradise. I imagine he is a big fan of
Chavez in Venezuela too