[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Bible Study Title: First Slave Owner in America was Black I love actual history. Not the stuff the left makes up, but real, actual history. Anthony Johnson was an Angolan who achieved freedom in the early 17th century Colony of Virginia, where he became one of the first black property owners and slaveholders. Held as an indentured servant in 1621, he earned his freedom after several years, which was accompanied by a grant of land. He later became a successful tobacco farmer. Notably, he is recognized for attaining great wealth after having been an indentured servant and has been referred to as “'the black patriarch' of the first community of Negro property owners in America". Johnson was captured in his native Angola by an enemy tribe and sold to Arab slave traders. He was eventually sold as an indentured servant to a merchant working for the Virginia Company. Johnson was sold to a white planter named Bennet as an indentured servant to work on his Virginia tobacco farm. Servants typically worked under an indenture contract for four to seven years to pay off their passage, room, board, lodging and freedom dues. In the early colonial years, most Africans in the Thirteen Colonies were held under such contracts of indentured servitude. When Anthony Johnson was released from servitude, he was legally recognized as a "free Negro." He developed a successful farm. In 1651 he owned 250 acres, and the services of four white and one black indentured servants. In 1653, John Casor, a black indentured servant whose contract Johnson appeared to have bought in the early 1640s, approached Captain Goldsmith, claiming his indenture had expired seven years earlier and that he was being held illegally by Johnson. A neighbor, Robert Parker, intervened and persuaded Johnson to free Casor. Parker offered Casor work, and he signed a term of indenture to the planter. Johnson sued Parker in the Northampton Court in 1654 for the return of Casor. The court initially found in favor of Parker, but Johnson appealed. In 1655, the court reversed its ruling.[10] Finding that Anthony Johnson still "owned" John Casor, the court ordered that he be returned with the court dues paid by Robert Parker. This was the first instance of a judicial determination in the Thirteen Colonies holding that a person who had committed no crime could be held in servitude for life. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Comments (1-10) not displayed.
And the Civil War over slavery which killed like 10-30% of the MALE American population. Your feeble attempts to make America look great comparing it to Rowan aside. Britain freed her slaves and not one death.............
#12. To: Justified (#1) In fact I believe Anthony Johnson was an indentured slave before he became a slave owner. He was. IIRC,he was a wealthy owner of a horse farm in Pa or Md when he died. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) #13. To: Pericles (#5) If the USA was such a great nation it would have outlawed slavery before the British did between 1833 and 1843. Still playing the victim card 300 years later,are you? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) #14. To: Pericles (#8) And the Civil War over slavery which killed like 10-30% of the American population. The War of Northern Aggression was NOT fought over slavery,and none other than Abraham Lincoln,the man that declared the war,is on record as saying it wasn't. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) #15. To: nolu chan (#10) Illinois was a slave state, and when it purportedly "eliminated" slavery, it implemented 99-year indentured servitude. But the good news was that they became free after working for 99 years! Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) #16. To: Pericles (#11) Britain freed her slaves and not one death............. We know your mind is feeble,but you are seriously claiming there was not ONE death? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) #17. To: sneakypete (#14) (Edited) Shut up, Pete. You are Greek. These people are beneath your half blood to take up their racial cause.
#18. To: Pericles (#17) Shut up, Pete. ESAD, You are Greek. No,my father was Greek. *I* am an American. These people are beneath your half blood to take up their racial cause. I don't play "racial cause" games,and Greeks are not my brothers. Or even half-brothers. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) #19. To: cranko, Pericles (#9) Nope. The American Civil War resulted in 620,000 dead Americans, which was less than 2% of a population of 32 million. NOT 10% to 30%. Less than 2%. At the time of the civil war I believe that was the percentage of slave owners in America. 2-3% The poor white farms wanted slavery so they could compete with slave labor from the big slave farms! Yes slavery was the reason we had the civil war!/s States rights was just a ruse to get the poor dumb white people to die in mass for the big slave farms.
#20. To: Pericles (#11) (Edited) And the Civil War over slavery which killed like 10-30% of the MALE American population. Your feeble attempts... Less than 2% of the population. If everyone who died was male, it would have been approximately 4% of the population. It's simple arithmetic (except for dimwitted leftists): 620,000 dead / 32,000,000 population = 0.019375. That's 1.9375% of the population dead. It's 3rd grade math, bozo. Perhaps this is why Greece is in so much trouble -- they can't add, subtract, multiply or divide!
#21. To: cranko (#20) 10% of military-age Northern men, 30% of military-age Southern men.
#22. To: nolu chan (#10) Illinois was a slave state, and when it purportedly "eliminated" slavery, it implemented 99-year indentured servitude. Okay, so instead of just posting it here, go update Wikipedia. They would love you because you have references to cite.
#23. To: Justified (#19) The poor white farms wanted slavery so they could compete with slave labor from the big slave farms! Yes slavery was the reason we had the civil war!/s The South fought for the dream of a slave empire stretching southwards, and the 90% of Southern soldiers who owed no slaves hoped to get them–like Wallenstein’s mercenaries or Napoleon’s foot-soldiers with field marshall’s batons in their rucksacks. Like Wallenstein’s and Napoleon’s armies, the Confederates fought with desperate courage, but for rapine rather than right. Crushing them was the noblest thing the United States ever did. http://pjmedia.com/spengler/
#24. To: sneakypete (#18) American is not an ethnicity and the confederates were traitors.
#25. To: Pericles (#21) (Edited) http://pjmedia.com/spengler/ If you are going to quote lunatics from the Lyndon LaRouche cult, then you are much, much sicker in the head than I originally thought. In all honesty, I've had a hard time pegging who you really are. At times you sound like a disgruntled American black. Other times you sound like a lazy anti-American Greek. Now we know who you are -- a crazy Lyndon LaRouche cultist. God help you.
#26. To: Pericles (#23) the Confederates fought with desperate courage, but for rapine rather than right. Crushing them was the noblest thing the United States ever did. The only reason the north won is that it could sacrifice the Irish who just want to become Americans. North was all about controlling the country and the south was just suppose to shut up and agree. The north was damn lucky there were hundreds of thousand of Irish human waste to be spent on keeping the north in power. If they could have only seen what their death made! The south could have given up slavery and the north would still have fought to keep the power structure the way it was. The north really did not give a rats ass about slavery and hated when the slaves head north to be with them.
#27. To: cranko (#25) (Edited) All Americans look the same to me and Goldman worked for Ronald St. Reagan administration.
#28. To: Pericles (#27) (Edited) Goldman worked for Ronald St. Reagan administration. Utter nonsense. There is a self-serving reference on Wikipedia that he "consulted" for the Reagan administration. The reference points to a list of articles that have nothing to do with him. I don't know if this is possible, but can you engage your brain just for 30 seconds? Who do Presidents appoint to their administrations? Long term donors and activists. Goldman was part of the LaRouche cult until at least 1982. So, the Reagan administration was going to appoint him to what??? ROTFLMAO... You are much sicker in the head than I originally thought. Much sicker.
#29. To: Pericles (#24) American is not an ethnicity So what? Neither is Greek. and the confederates were traitors. "Learn" that in Black History class,did ya? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) #30. To: cranko, Pericles (#25) In all honesty, I've had a hard time pegging who you really are. Confused,fearful,jealous,and the owner of a PC AA education. I'd almost be willing to bet one of his parents was black and the other Greek,and he claims to be a Greek because he doesn't want to self-identify or be identified as as a black because he secretly identifies blacks as inferior. It ain't PC to say so,but that's why so many blacks convert to Islam. They want to self-identify and be identified as Arabs instead of slaves that came from Africa. Better to be the slavemaster than the slave. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) #31. To: cranko (#28) that he "consulted" for the Reagan administration. Yea, he worked for Reagan. I did not claim he was a cabinet member. And Reagan was an ex new dealer in his youth also.
#32. To: cranko, sneakypete (#30) (Edited) I'd almost be willing to bet one of his parents was black and the other Greek,and he claims to be a Greek because he doesn't want to self- identify or be identified as as a black because he secretly identifies blacks as inferior. Or I am a black Russian - Which is why I have a history of posting pro Serbian anti NATO posts - I think the stupid part of Pete is his "American" heritage. He is half Greek so we can't be too harsh. LOL Pete, you justify everything I say about Americans.
#33. To: Pericles (#32) Or I am a black Russian In one respect,yes,you are. Russians are closely identified with communism,and you are at heart a communist. The main thing you are is a man with a (well deserved) inferiority complex,a 3rd rate PC education, and a hatred for America. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) #34. To: Pericles (#31) Yea, he worked for Reagan Do you also believe that LaRouche was innocent of credit card fraud and instead was a political prisoner?
#35. To: Pericles (#31) David Goldman is not telling the full truth about his years in the LaRouche movement
Goldman writes that he "spent some years--from 1976 to 1986--in a gnostic cult under the leadership of a man named Lyndon LaRouche." So, when did he work for the Reagan Administration??? LOL!!!!!
#36. To: sneakypete, Pericles (#16) We know your mind is feeble,but you are seriously claiming there was not ONE death? You have to read carefully, Pete. The ended slavery in England. The British slaves were not in England, but almost entirely in British colonies.
#37. To: cranko (#35) So, when did he work for the Reagan Administration??? LOL!!!!! How does that disprove his claim that 10-30% of the fighting age males lost their lives?
#38. To: Pericles (#37) How does that disprove his claim that 10-30% of the fighting age males lost their lives? You have made three contradictory claims on this thread: First, you said that upwards of 30% of the American population lost their lives in the Civil War. I showed you that it was less than 2%. Second, you said that upwards of 30% of American males lost their lives in the civil war. No, it was 4%. Third, you said that upwards of 30% of "fighting age" American males lost their lives in the Civil War. The figure accepted by historians is that 1 in 13 (7.7%) of military age men lost their lives in the Civil War. What claim would you like to make now? That the British secretly control the world and that the Queen of England is a drug dealer? That is what you LaRouchers believe isn't it?
#39. To: cranko (#38) I did not make three contradictory claims - I remembered it was 10-30% casualties but I did not clarify what % of the population was being talked about - 10% for Union and - 30% for Confederate casualties of fight age males. So I found you a source. You attack the source but not the %. All because I said that the USA was INFERIOR because of how it freed its slaves - through a bloody war that depopulated the South. Even Czar freed the Serfs there was no war and those Russians love a drunken fight.
#40. To: Justified, cranko, Pericles (#19) At the time of the civil war I believe that was the percentage of slave owners in America. 2-3% It sort of depends on what numbers, or subset of numbers are used. Below as some of the Census numbers.
http://mapserver.lib.virginia.edu/php/start.php?year=V1860 1860 census 393,975 TOTAL slaveholders (8 in KS & NE territories) UNION
77,343 = 2.4% of total population of these states. CONFEDERACY
316,632 = 3.5% of total population of these states. The Confederacy had 4.1 times as many slaveholders as the Union states. TOTAL POPULATION OF SLAVE STATES/Territories UNION
CONFEDERACY
#41. To: nolu chan (#36) You have to read carefully, Pete. The ended slavery in England. The British slaves were not in England, but almost entirely in British colonies. Ahhhh! Thanks for clearing up the mystery. Pericles is completely shameless,isn't he? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) #42. To: Pericles, cranko (#21)
[Pericles #8] And the Civil War over slavery which killed like 10-30% of the American population.
620,000 dead http://www.history.com/news/civil-war-deadlier-than-previously-thought
Often referred to as the bloodiest conflict in U.S. history, the Civil War claimed more American lives than any other military action in which the country has taken part. Now, a professor at Binghamton University in New York has used 19th-century census data to show that the most commonly cited death toll—620,000—may significantly underestimate the true human cost, and that the real number of Civil War dead could be upwards of 20 percent higher. Goldman's claims appear absurd. Civil War statistics are arguable and argued, but Goldman's unsourced statistics appear to be pulled out of his ass and not supported by the most inflated sources.
America never recovered from its Civil War, which killed nearly a million combatants on both sides. 620K is not "nearly a million," and David P. Goldman cites nothing as the source of his inflated claim. It is revolting to read Goldman's horseshit. If 10 to 30% of a subset of the population was killed, 10 times the alleged dead yields the higher limit. 10/3 times the alleged dead yields the lower limit. The total population was 31,443,321. That would indicate the total male population was somewhere around 15 million. Total civil war deaths from disease was about double the amount from combat. About 90% of Black soldier deaths were from disease, largely due to discriminatory medical care. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/death-numbers/http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/death-numbers/ [excerpts of stats]
From 1861 to 1865, the Civil War ravaged America. It still holds several notorious records, such as the highest number of average deaths per day (504). Read more of the shocking statistics from the War that divided our nation. 10% of 2.1M union soldiers is 210,000. There were nearly 400,000 such deaths. 30% of 880K confederate soldiers is 264,000. This is within reality. Total deaths, per Goldman, would be 474,000. This stat should be 620,000 or higher, including non-combat deaths due to disease, accident, or unknown as POW, etc. STATISTICS WITH A SOURCE https://www.phil.muni.cz/~vndrzl/amstudies/civilwar_stats.htm [excerpt of stats]
Federal army deaths: 389,753 Total deaths would be: 678,753, including non-battle deaths. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war
Union & Confederate: http://civilwarhome.com/casualties.htm
At least 618,000 Americans died in the Civil War, and some experts say the toll reached 700,000. The number that is most often quoted is 620,000. At any rate, these casualties exceed the nation's loss in all its other wars, from the Revolution through Vietnam.
#43. To: sneakypete (#41) Pericles is completely shameless,isn't he? Well, see my #42. I have argued for years with Pericles (Destro, et. al). We tend to keep it relatively civil. Way back, I spent about 5 years in the FR Smoky Backroom on the North-South foodfight threads. That was educational, if not very civil.
#44. To: nolu chan (#42) The issue was sourcing and I provided the ref. Also: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/science/civil-war-toll-up-by-20-percent-in- new-estimate.html?_r=0 For 110 years, the numbers stood as gospel: 618,222 men died in the Civil War, 360,222 from the North and 258,000 from the South — by far the greatest toll of any war in American history. But new research shows that the numbers were far too low. By combing through newly digitized census data from the 19th century, J. David Hacker, a demographic historian from Binghamton University in New York, has recalculated the death toll and increased it by more than 20 percent — to 750,000.
#45. To: Pericles (#44) (Edited)
#46. To: nolu chan (#43) have argued for years with Pericles (Destro, et. al). We tend to keep it relatively civil. Way back, I spent about 5 years in the FR Smoky Backroom on the North-South foodfight threads. That was educational, if not very civil. We have never argued except when I called Ted Cruze a grifter. I am also not a 9/11 place explosives in the building truther but I cna't remember if you are a truther on that or not. I am more of a let it happen on purpose if thats how it went down kind of thinker.
#47. To: Pericles (#44) The issue was sourcing and I provided the ref. The ref just puked up claims from out of his butt. There is no source there for his outrageous, impossible claims.
#48. To: Pericles (#44) Also: Your newest link is for an article about J. David Hacker's report (J. David Hacker. "A Census-Based Count of the Civil War Dead." Civil War History 57.4 (2011): 307-348. Project MUSE. Web. 24 Jun. 2015). Hacker's report is obviously not the source of David P. Goldman's spurious figures. Goldman's figures appear to have been conjured up from a magic eight ball. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/science/civil-war-toll-up-by-20-percent-in-new-estimate.html New Estimate Raises Civil War Death Toll http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/recounting-the-dead/#more-105317 Hacker's article is at the above link. Recounting the Dead The battlefield deaths are reported after battles. The deaths from illness and accidents, suicides, and whatnot are difficult to quantify. If someone is not included on a census report of 1870, it does not mean he died in the war, or that a death was attributable to the war. It is a SWAG. http://www.civilwar.org/education/higher-number.html
Should the number be higher? http://www.historynet.com/civil-war-casualties
War by the numbers As Holzer notes, the 1870 census was a hash. In addition, the census difference from 1860 to 1870 does not represent dead people. It represents people not in the 1870 census for whatever reason. There was a large swath of sparsely populated territory to the West that they could have moved to. The Lincoln and civil war mythologists would swoon over "helpful" studies if based on the output of a magic eight ball.
#49. To: Pericles (#46) We have never argued except when I called Ted Cruze a grifter. We engaged in vigorous discussion.
#50. To: Pericles (#44) By combing through newly digitized census data from the 19th century, J. David Hacker, a demographic historian from Binghamton University in New York, has recalculated the death toll and increased it by more than 20 percent — to 750,000. I've read the same. I've also seen estimates of over 800,000.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|