Whites-Only Prom? Yikes

Originally posted by Lord Nicon


Thank you so much giga for actually taking the time to explain. I respect that. And your right the flag isnt about slaves but others give it bad publicity. Its sort of a mixed bag, but in terms of the confederates and southerners, 5 to 10 percent owning slaves makes no difference whatsoever. The magnitude of slaves that were brought over is one of the more serious matters because its not as if it were one slave per person> that would be different. And with the abolition of slavery, as you put it, being the final straw it was still something not worth fighting for morally, (but of course not in those times because blacks were only worth 3/4\'s of a person if i remember correctly). And during a lage portion of time, the south was booming economically due to such products like tobbaco. This is one of the reasons that weathly slave owners lived in large European style houses, in the image of an aristocracy.

Just to clarify a little on your post...

Cotton was the cash crop at the time.  Tobacco wasn\'t nearly as large as cotton.  As far as slavery goes... blaming white southern slave owners soley is a mistake.  I believe there are three groups that share the blame for the longetivity of slavery in the US in the following order.  

1.  The Southern Plantation owners in the US for supplying a demand for slaves.

2.  The European slave traders who made ports of call on the coast of Africa to transport slaves to North America.

3.  The Africans who sold their enemies into slavery.

None of the 3 could have worked without the other 2.  In regards to the number of slaves in the South, I believe you are on to something Nicon.  If my memory serves me correctly, slaves counted as portion of the total population in the south (as you pointed out - a certain percentage of a white person) and since the House of Representatives is based on population the slave owners were all for counting blacks as part of the population even if it wasn\'t a 1 for 1 count.  The hypocracy in this is absurd as these same people who were being "counted" weren\'t even considered citizens - rather property.

Originally posted by GigaShadow


Just to clarify a little on your post...

Cotton was the cash crop at the time.  Tobacco wasn\'t nearly as large as cotton.  As far as slavery goes... blaming white southern slave owners soley is a mistake.  I believe there are three groups that share the blame for the longetivity of slavery in the US in the following order.  

1.  The Southern Plantation owners in the US for supplying a demand for slaves.

2.  The European slave traders who made ports of call on the coast of Africa to transport slaves to North America.

3.  The Africans who sold their enemies into slavery.

None of the 3 could have worked without the other 2.  In regards to the number of slaves in the South, I believe you are on to something Nicon.  If my memory serves me correctly, slaves counted as portion of the total population in the south (as you pointed out - a certain percentage of a white person) and since the House of Representatives is based on population the slave owners were all for counting blacks as part of the population even if it wasn\'t a 1 for 1 count.  The hypocracy in this is absurd as these same people who were being "counted" weren\'t even considered citizens - rather property.

Very true. One thing though was that the Africans selling their enemies. Obviously it was for self empowerment and none sold their own tribe members. If it was known that the people would be descriminated against based apon their race, the African traders included, I\'m sure they would take offence to it. Not saying that all this trading would stop. And yes i did mean plantation owners. That was my mistake. The 10% that owned slaves had plenty; not only did a black account for 2/3 or whatever it was, if you remember the Jim Crowe laws that went in act, they made it even more difficult for a black to have any say whatsoever where their great parents had to be a citezen and they had to be able to read etc etc. where as even poor whites never had to abide by these laws.

Originally posted by Lord Nicon


Very true. One thing though was that the Africans selling their enemies. Obviously it was for self empowerment and none sold their own tribe members. If it was known that the people would be descriminated against based apon their race, the African traders included, I\'m sure they would take offence to it. Not saying that all this trading would stop. And yes i did mean plantation owners. That was my mistake. The 10% that owned slaves had plenty; not only did a black account for 2/3 or whatever it was, if you remember the Jim Crowe laws that went in act, they made it even more difficult for a black to have any say whatsoever where their great parents had to be a citezen and they had to be able to read etc etc. where as even poor whites never had to abide by these laws.

I agree there was a hypocritical system in place prior to the Civil Rights movement in that poor uneducated whites were not held to the same standards as blacks and that is a direct result of the "Dixiecrat" era that plagued the South in the 50\'s and early 60\'s.  For those that don\'t know, Dixiecrats were Southern Democrats who voted against integration.  Most of those politicians later went on to become Republicans (Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, etc), but I think the prime example of that era was George Wallace - the Governor of Alabama who chained himself to the doors of the University of Alabama to try and block the first black students who were attending.

On the matter of Africans selling Africans, I agree it was mostly tribes selling their prisoners that they captured after tribal battles.  This isn\'t to say some didn\'t sell some of their own tribal members due to personal conflicts... who knows... that is a part of unrecorded history.

[Living-In-Clip]

Note: The swastika - was actually a symbol of peace and other things, until the Nazi\'s tainted it. Therefor, I see nothing wong with swastika\'s.

-shrugs-

For the record:

1. Africans did indeed sell other Africans into slavery. However, not nearly as many were sold by other Africans than were captured by Europeans.

2. At the time Slavery EVERYWHERE but Europe and Eurocentric America was not the horrible life that we have read about. In fact, slaves were just unpaid servants and could(occasionally) rise to positions of power in society.

Originally posted by Lord Nicon
Trust me i dont talk about something before i know anything about it. I have been there and im talking about south east my friend. As in alabama, georgia etc. Atlanta isnt all that much if you ask me. I have family there and have been there at least 7 times. I could care less about texas (as far as confederates are concerned). I have family all down there. Keep to these locations pal. Do what is the biggest high rise city down there that even comes close to chicago etc? And tobbaco can shuve a big one. I dont like smoking anyway cause its retarded in most cases and has not one good thing about it besides the fact that it brings money back to the country. Thats not even forgiveable cause some of it is at the expence of some childrens lives. So dont tell me about ignorance, i know plenty about it.

You are pretty ignorant about the southern economy. Atlanta\'s airport is the second busiest in the country next to Chicago\'s. Atlanta has the second LARGEST public transportation system next to New York and southern cities have the fastest growing tech industries in the country. You speak from ignorance.

Originally posted by Lord Nicon
This i know it doesnt stand for keeping slaves. Thats obvious, but if it isnt the only thing then why dont you tell me what else they were fighting for instead of telling me that it wasnt the only thing. Please. Highschool history book? Since you know so much and seem to feel so passionately about the subject, enlighten me. Really. And since when were the books wrong in the first place? Think they give you southern boys a bad rep?

For the most part ALL text books give inaccurate information. The truth is generally censored and (slightly)altered to remain politically correct or to not ruffle feathers. The civil war was not so much about slavery as it was about states rights and money. Slavery was just the glue that held all the North\'s problems with the south together.

I thought ATL\'s airport was 4th or 5th???

O\'Hare
D/FW
LaGuardia
???
????

Nope Hartsfield is #2 for now.  Saw it on the news a few months ago.

Originally posted by Gohan
For the record:

1. Africans did indeed sell other Africans into slavery. However, not nearly as many were sold by other Africans than were captured by Europeans.

2. At the time Slavery EVERYWHERE but Europe and Eurocentric America was not the horrible life that we have read about. In fact, slaves were just unpaid servants and could(occasionally) rise to positions of power in society.

You are pretty ignorant about the southern economy. Atlanta\'s airport is the second busiest in the country next to Chicago\'s. Atlanta has the second LARGEST public transportation system next to New York and southern cities have the fastest growing tech industries in the country. You speak from ignorance.

For the most part ALL text books give inaccurate information. The truth is generally censored and (slightly)altered to remain politically correct or to not ruffle feathers. The civil war was not so much about slavery as it was about states rights and money. Slavery was just the glue that held all the North\'s problems with the south together.

First of all i didnt say the souther economy was crap. I was simply saying that when you look at big business you think of chicago etc. not atlanta. Public transit isnt really a huge money maker for the state and while it is very large it still does not bring attencion to atlanta being a huge business state. Im not saying its not but compared to cities like chicago, it gets less notification for its achievements. I know all about it so please dont tell me about speaking from ignorance.

I never said text books were right either and i know that some of the truth is masked. I just asked the question since when were they wrong? I am not taking sides when asking the question. You obviously dont know where im coming from. I am sorry if i offended you (being an atlanta boy and all) but im talking in all seriousness without much bias and with as little ignorance as possible .

Originally posted by GigaShadow
Nope Hartsfield is #2 for now.  Saw it on the news a few months ago.

Where is LAX? O\'Hare really is # 1? Yeay! lol. (chicago pride). I thought LaGuardia would be at least a place higher.

1. I\'m a Boston boy. (Sox, Pats, Celts) Get it right.

2. When you think of Big Business most people do NOT think of Chicago. Maybe YOU do seeing as how you are from Chicago.

3. If you were to compare just about any statistic that is kept on individual cities you will see that Atlanta beats chicago in everything but population. Just a FYI

4. If the truth is masked, censored, and altered wouldn\'t that make some of the information wrong?

Originally posted by Gohan

3. If you were to compare just about any statistic that is kept on individual cities you will see that Atlanta beats chicago in everything but population. Just a FYI

Now you know you gotta provide some links on that one.

Originally posted by Lord Nicon


Where is LAX? O\'Hare really is # 1? Yeay! lol. (chicago pride). I thought LaGuardia would be at least a place higher.

In 2002 Hartsfield was #1 in the world.  LAX was #5.  This is passengers only and doesn\'t count cargo.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004547.html

Oh and another southern city is #1 in cargo.  Memphis.

That one surprised me.

Originally posted by Gohan
1. I\'m a Boston boy. (Sox, Pats, Celts) Get it right.

2. When you think of Big Business most people do NOT think of Chicago. Maybe YOU do seeing as how you are from Chicago.

3. If you were to compare just about any statistic that is kept on individual cities you will see that Atlanta beats chicago in everything but population. Just a FYI

4. If the truth is masked, censored, and altered wouldn\'t that make some of the information wrong?

1 then why is atlanta on your loctation? I assume that you recently moved?

2. Please back that up because from many people that i have spoken to think chicago is a very large buisness city. Playboy basicaly started here as a matter of fact. I dont belive that all of our skyscrapers come from rich investors for little mom and pop shops.

3. And yes, please provide us with some UPDATED links that proves your point. Since you are not from Atlanta.

4. And just because the truth is masked doesnt mean that they are wrong. They may not tell you somethings but that absolutely doesnt make them false. Altered... well you would really have to provide me with some evidence. Maybe even mental but any grown person that has had some experience outside of history books should know some truth.

Just from what I\'ve been studying lately in my Architecture design classes I know some rail system that Atlanta put in that was unmatched for city transportation.  Then also the 100 of millions of housing that was to be put along the rail lines.  That sounds like something I thought could be thrown in there.

Its called Marta