On Tuesday, July 17, 2018 at 12:14:57 PM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 7/17/18 11:28 AM, 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.



I'm not going to waste time trying to convince you righties of the error
of your ways on these subjects...Wiki has an answer suitable for you:

While slavery was institutionally recognized by most societies, it has
now been outlawed in all recognized countries, the last being Mauritania
in 2007. Nevertheless, there are an estimated 45.8 million people
subject to some form of modern slavery worldwide. The most common form
of the slave trade is now commonly referred to as human trafficking. In
other areas, slavery (or unfree labour) continues through practices such
as debt bondage, the most widespread form of slavery today, serfdom,
domestic servants kept in captivity, certain adoptions in which children
are forced to work as slaves, child soldiers, and forced marriage.


So what did the wiki BS have to do with:

"I guess you've chosen to ignore the fact that legalized slavery did
end everywhere else around the world without fighting any wars?"

Answer: Absolutely nothing.

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:14:53 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 7/17/18 11:28 AM, 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.



I'm not going to waste time trying to convince you righties of the error
of your ways on these subjects...Wiki has an answer suitable for you:

While slavery was institutionally recognized by most societies, it has
now been outlawed in all recognized countries, the last being Mauritania
in 2007. Nevertheless, there are an estimated 45.8 million people
subject to some form of modern slavery worldwide. The most common form
of the slave trade is now commonly referred to as human trafficking. In
other areas, slavery (or unfree labour) continues through practices such
as debt bondage, the most widespread form of slavery today, serfdom,
domestic servants kept in captivity, certain adoptions in which children
are forced to work as slaves, child soldiers, and forced marriage.

Slavery still exists.

There's no real "free market economy" anywhere in the world. If you want
to cite the USA as an example, keep in mind that there are many ways
corporations collude with other corporations and governmental entities
to maintain artificially high prices for many items and services.

That's a super example of why the blacks in this country complain of oppression - they're being
'trafficked'. Ah yes, human trafficking is an accepted form of 'slavery' in this country. I suppose
we should give the poor more money to stop this practice, eh Krausee?

Oh, wait, maybe you're talking of Nigeria? The discussion had to do with slavery in this country.

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.

Isn't that what you said would bring Saddam down and that war was a
stupid thing?
It is funny that a war on foreign soil is so distasteful but a war
right here is "the only way" we can resolve what was basically an
economic issue.
In fact the economics didn't change that much either. If you were a
black person in Mississippi in 1866, your life really did not change
that much. You were still living in the same shack, you were doing the
same job and you were eating the same food. The only difference was
you got paid for the job and you turned around and paid the plantation
owner all of that money for your room and board. Certainly you could
leave but to go do what?
You said it yourself. It was still virtual slavery ... 600,000 dead
Americans later.
BTW the life was not much different if you were a "free" textile
worker in New York or a "free" coal miner in West Virginia through
most of the next 100 years. They were usually white people.

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

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:14:53 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

On 7/17/18 11:28 AM, 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.



I'm not going to waste time trying to convince you righties of the error
of your ways on these subjects...Wiki has an answer suitable for you:

While slavery was institutionally recognized by most societies, it has
now been outlawed in all recognized countries, the last being Mauritania
in 2007. Nevertheless, there are an estimated 45.8 million people
subject to some form of modern slavery worldwide. The most common form
of the slave trade is now commonly referred to as human trafficking. In
other areas, slavery (or unfree labour) continues through practices such
as debt bondage, the most widespread form of slavery today, serfdom,
domestic servants kept in captivity, certain adoptions in which children
are forced to work as slaves, child soldiers, and forced marriage.

Slavery still exists.

Perhaps in the 3d world but it is mostly because nobody in the
developed world cares.

There's no real "free market economy" anywhere in the world. If you want
to cite the USA as an example, keep in mind that there are many ways
corporations collude with other corporations and governmental entities
to maintain artificially high prices for many items and services.

Yet the prices of most things traded in the free markets are at
historically low levels.
The things that are the highest priced are the things that the
government regulates the most ... like drugs.
The government is a willing partner in the collusion that drives drug
prices because they go out of their way to create a non-competitive
environment. Perhaps it is the billions in bribes that congress takes
every year that has something to do with it.
I don't trust the government because I understand they are for sale to
the highest bidder.

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:23:49 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:14:53 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 7/17/18 11:28 AM, 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.



I'm not going to waste time trying to convince you righties of the error
of your ways on these subjects...Wiki has an answer suitable for you:

While slavery was institutionally recognized by most societies, it has
now been outlawed in all recognized countries, the last being Mauritania
in 2007. Nevertheless, there are an estimated 45.8 million people
subject to some form of modern slavery worldwide. The most common form
of the slave trade is now commonly referred to as human trafficking. In
other areas, slavery (or unfree labour) continues through practices such
as debt bondage, the most widespread form of slavery today, serfdom,
domestic servants kept in captivity, certain adoptions in which children
are forced to work as slaves, child soldiers, and forced marriage.

Slavery still exists.

There's no real "free market economy" anywhere in the world. If you want
to cite the USA as an example, keep in mind that there are many ways
corporations collude with other corporations and governmental entities
to maintain artificially high prices for many items and services.

That's a super example of why the blacks in this country complain of oppression - they're being
'trafficked'. Ah yes, human trafficking is an accepted form of 'slavery' in this country. I suppose
we should give the poor more money to stop this practice, eh Krausee?

Oh, wait, maybe you're talking of Nigeria? The discussion had to do with slavery in this country.

Harry doesn't seem to mind human trafficking when it is across our
southern border. Coyotes can take money to dump tens of thousands of
people on our side of the fence and that is fine with him. He even
seems to be in favor of giving children back to whomever they were
trafficked across the border with, no questions asked.

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:57:12 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:23:49 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:14:53 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 7/17/18 11:28 AM, 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.



I'm not going to waste time trying to convince you righties of the error
of your ways on these subjects...Wiki has an answer suitable for you:

While slavery was institutionally recognized by most societies, it has
now been outlawed in all recognized countries, the last being Mauritania
in 2007. Nevertheless, there are an estimated 45.8 million people
subject to some form of modern slavery worldwide. The most common form
of the slave trade is now commonly referred to as human trafficking. In
other areas, slavery (or unfree labour) continues through practices such
as debt bondage, the most widespread form of slavery today, serfdom,
domestic servants kept in captivity, certain adoptions in which children
are forced to work as slaves, child soldiers, and forced marriage.

Slavery still exists.

There's no real "free market economy" anywhere in the world. If you want
to cite the USA as an example, keep in mind that there are many ways
corporations collude with other corporations and governmental entities
to maintain artificially high prices for many items and services.

That's a super example of why the blacks in this country complain of oppression - they're being
'trafficked'. Ah yes, human trafficking is an accepted form of 'slavery' in this country. I suppose
we should give the poor more money to stop this practice, eh Krausee?

Oh, wait, maybe you're talking of Nigeria? The discussion had to do with slavery in this country.

Harry doesn't seem to mind human trafficking when it is across our
southern border. Coyotes can take money to dump tens of thousands of
people on our side of the fence and that is fine with him. He even
seems to be in favor of giving children back to whomever they were
trafficked across the border with, no questions asked.

Harry is a f'ing fool, as is his buddy, Donna the Fool.

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 12:14:53 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

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.



I'm not going to waste time trying to convince you righties of the error
of your ways on these subjects...Wiki has an answer suitable for you:

While slavery was institutionally recognized by most societies, it has
now been outlawed in all recognized countries, the last being Mauritania
in 2007.

===

A typical twisted non-answer from our favorite narcissist who, in his
own mind, couldn't possibly be wrong about anything.

Hey Johnny....does it make y'all feel better about yourself when y'all call others names?

On 7/17/18 1:43 PM, wrote:
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


And once again, your fantasies about me are completely wrong. Oh,
Chavez...it was my privilege to shake hands with César Chávez many many
years ago at an AFL-CIO-United Farm workers event in California. I was
never a fan of Hugo Chávez.

I would certainly like the American unions help organize workers in Cuba
so they don't become economic slaves to the American corporations that
will get in there sooner or later. I've been working with an
anti-Castro, anti-communist group concerned about Cuba for several decades.