doublegunshop.com - home Forums Should Blacks (or whoever) be allowed...

Just uncovered from the National Geographic Society archives!

An actual slave auction!

http://youtu.be/zB7MichlL1k


I don't know jOe. Grub worms are probably better than all the crap I see folks buying with their bridge cards.

What do you call cherry picking data and totally ignoring the contributions of the 87% of the U.S. population that was not black slaves?
I wasn't the one who dishonestly distorted history King... you were.

But there you go again with the non-Ad Hominum name calling, denigration, and demonization. What a filthy hypocrite!


Lonesome Roads, since it is your tax dollars that fund those Bridge Cards, it's only a matter of time before Libtards like King blame you for the health problems that result from their junk food diets. But thanks to ObamaCare, you get to pay for that too... as if you already weren't. But why do they call those Welfare/Food Stamp Cards Bridge Cards anyway? Talk about your Bridge to Nowhere.

'Its' history must be a pack of lies or at least forgettable if we are to 'progress', right? How would you describe a person that peddles in revisionist history.

What's revisionist of National Geographic's account, Craig? US slavery is documented throughout the land, acknowledged by your revered institutions. Only hatred and colossal ignorance of pathological intensity would deny the historical record and call it bullshit.

Slavery is well documented in the writings of the early African explorers as being started by Muslims before European exploration of the African continent. It continued as late as 1922 in Central Africa until French military action eliminated it. Africans were not the only race sold into slavery by Muslims, and slavery continues to this day in Islamic countries. Point being, America is not solely to blame for the plight of Africans being sold into slavery, but liberals would have you believe so. Virtually every nation in the world has been guilty of contributing to slavery at one time or another, but it is popular today to highlight only America's participation in the trade. Since the beginning of the 1900's, the United States has probably done more to instill freedom around the world than any other nation. If there is a debt owed today to blacks because of the history of slavery, it is certainly Islam that owes the debt.

Gary, the thread started with a question about blacks and went off in all directions as some are inclined to do. Slavery wasn't only a burden of the United States---it was everywhere---but it drew more attention because a war fought over it nearly split the country asunder, and blacks were still fighting for their constitutional rights a century after abolition. The world is in America's debt, as you say, but let's not forget the tremendous contributions of immigrants who made it what it is. (I'm currently working on a story of a free black woman in Boston sold into slavery in Nova Scotia in 1790.)

I don't revere it, but if there is one thing we've picked up here it is that 'institutions' become old tired and worn. Bullshit is your term, not mine. Can you accept a question pulled from right out of the middle of your NG account?

'By 1850 2.5 million enslaved Africans employed in agriculture', the majority on cotton plantations. 'Upward of ten percent of the enslaved African population in the United States lived in cities'.

Official US census numbers put the African slave population at around 4 million during the era. What's the simple math say, about 400 thousand lived in cities?

Your 'source' goes on to say, 'In southern cities they totaled approximately a third of the population'. So let me get this straight, there were only about 800k white US citizens living in southern cities.

I sense a gross distortion and exaggeration, knowingly perhaps, of the presence and contribution of the African slave in the US at the time. I say the National Geographic that I grew up with did not have the editorial discretion to make pc agenda maybe 'revisions'.

The only reason I believe you quoted that piece is because it fit your ideology. Growing up, most every boy knew they could get a glimpse of wrinkly boobs on some pygmy. Why don't you condemn the rag for exploiting black women by pushing misogyny and racism? Familiar tactic though, demonize anyone who might question a pc friendly article.

Drew, as in past tense? Doesn't it draw, as in today, more attention because it conveniently fits an ideological agenda. If the 'world is in America's debt', why are the founding fathers and white shapers of the then new country being phases out of classroom 'history' books and 'teaching'.

I don't think so much an ideological agenda of liberal and conservative as our perverse nature of always needing someone to pick on, and moving to a state where most people can't secure the benefits the law promises.

"To no one will we sell, to no one deny . . justice," the Magna Carta promised nearly 800 years ago, and similarly the fathers and shapers of the new republic never imagined your privileged royalty of the Kennedys, Bushes and Clintons.

Think of it: Jeb and Hilary in '16. All in the family.

Wonderful words and declarations are everywhere, chiselled in marble and writ large in words of gold, Craig. They'll always be there, they won't go away. To err is human, and we usually do that in our self interests, too.

You'll have to take your sense of gross distortions and opinion of editorial discretion to NG, Craig. NG as all educational publishing institutions has fact checkers.

It is a surprise that you claim to know of NG's editorial discretion "to make pc agenda." I've known the Grosvenor family for at least 50 years. They spend their summers here, just across the bay. The NG founder died there. I'm currently working on a book with NG assistance.

I posted the NG account not because it fit my ideology but because of the magazine's scrupulous reputation for accuracy. If you want to take on acknowledged common history, go to it.