What about blacks that owned slaves? I ask this, as person with a black heritage that was owned by a black man. There are currently 7 million people in Africa living in slavery and most enslaved by blacks...are they racist?
You get that every race on earth has been slave holders and enslaved right? Or do you think it's unique to blacks?
How about when owner and slave are of the same race? Which historically is pretty common. What's it the epitome of then?
Nah, Blacks can't be racist. It's a rule or a law or sumpin'.
That is seeming mildly racist. I have no need for safe spaces, etc. but...
Where can I find that information? My grandfather was born in 1898 and he told me everyone outside the city had guns and hunted. Did the northern citizens rearm themselves after the war?
OK. Thanks for sharing.
You going to link to this?
The best study on 1800s gun ownership was done by the College of William & Mary who looked at probate records that listed assets. Of course there is some variation state to state and some outlier statistics, but generally 69-78% of estates contained firearms. That sounds about right, but there would be a significant difference in rural vs urban areas. In one state, Maryland I believe, more households contained guns than tables. Lol.
You are an historical illiterate. Where did you learn this crap?
Slavery is a failed economic platform that almost every society in the history of civilization engaged in.
I saw the movie and thought it was okay. I do disagree with this review though. First, I didn't get anything "Trumpy" about the President. Secondly, there was no backstory. So, there was nothing definitively showing who were actually the heros and who were the villains. Anyway, it's an action movie with a typical and predictable plot. Not much more than that.Here's a review of the movie by Colonel Schlichter:
Spoiler alert—it’s a bad movie, and you don’t want to see it. I’m going to tell you some of what happens, but you shouldn’t care because, if you’re smart, you’re going to listen to me and not spend money on it.
The problem with "Civil War" isn’t its point of view, to the extent it has one. Now, you can tell that, beneath the surface, it has a generic left-wing orientation. The bad guy president is vaguely Trumpy. He’s a straight white male, of course. In fact, every single villain is a straight, white male. None of the major heroes is a straight, white male. You can make movies where the villains are straight, white males, and where none of the heroes are straight, white males, but it’s now a woke Hollywood cliche to make all the villains straight, white males, and none of the heroes straight, white males. You can’t unsee it. Rural white guy? Definitely a villain. Black woman? Hero!
Here's a review of the movie by Colonel Schlichter:
Spoiler alert—it’s a bad movie, and you don’t want to see it. I’m going to tell you some of what happens, but you shouldn’t care because, if you’re smart, you’re going to listen to me and not spend money on it.
The problem with "Civil War" isn’t its point of view, to the extent it has one. Now, you can tell that, beneath the surface, it has a generic left-wing orientation. The bad guy president is vaguely Trumpy. He’s a straight white male, of course. In fact, every single villain is a straight, white male. None of the major heroes is a straight, white male. You can make movies where the villains are straight, white males, and where none of the heroes are straight, white males, but it’s now a woke Hollywood cliche to make all the villains straight, white males, and none of the heroes straight, white males. You can’t unsee it. Rural white guy? Definitely a villain. Black woman? Hero!
I think it's already started.
What was the circumstance of your ancestor being owned by a black man? What state? What years? It was very rare and most, not all, were purchasing their spouses, children, parents, siblings, or friends in danger of being sold into a worse situation. It's how they self emancipated. There are also just horrible people that believed owning another human being is ok.
My understanding of his review is that in order to make a civil war story compelling and believable you have to present a plausible ideological conflict that would trigger such an event. On this I agree 100% with Schlichter.
Are you my genealogy validator?
Already stated there are many reasons for everthing. Some had not choice. Some made bad choices. I asked you some questions that you don't seem to want to answer. Because some found ways to "self Emancipate, does not mean there was not Civil War. I said nothing about validating your genealogy. You brought up the fact that you are a descendent of someone owned by a black man. Do you not think people would want to know more about that? Do you know all the circumstances? I was simply pointing out it was rare and gave some reasons why the practice happened. Stated there are just bad people. Black people as well as white and every other race.
Your response is interesting. Some made bad choices? REALLY? Yet, 160 years later, white fragility is trying to atone for the sins of the past without regard to the current black victimhood. Shut the front door!
