Slavery was objectivelly terrible because it allowed to niggers to legally come to america

End of story

>>18615475
they're calling it the bp any fp has ever been

>>18615477
For the USA it sure was their biigest problem

Imagine how crime rates would drop if the usa never imported blacks

>>18615471
Slavery was bad, is bad, and always will be bad. If at some point in the future people forget that owning someone else's 5 year old kid is bad, well fuck them as well.

>>18615475
>>18615477
I promise you that no one at the time would force you to go and live on a plantation in Louisiana; making negroes pick cotton was actually a pretty essential component of this industrial revolution you so enjoy, so show a little gratitude to the planters. It's insane how they get all the blame for the crimes of abolitionists who unleashed them on the country.

>>18615482
>Slavery was bad
Where in the Bible does it say this? Because I hope by "bad" you don't really mean "I don't personally like it."

>>18615475
>>18615477
i wish the slaves were never imported into the new world, imagine a continent without niggers

>>18615483
Plantation were bad for the economy actually

The best for the usa would be distribute these lands in the south to white europeans families so they would pick cotton from their own properties, distributing wealth, attracting white immigrants and keeping the blacks in africa

Pretty bad, the slave industry promotes a cash crop economy which while profitable to the landowners is generally poor to the actual economical development of the country by disencouraging the development of technology and more complex businesses which require an actually freed population.

>>18615483
See anon that is what im talking about >>18615492

In the long term nigger were damaging the american economy by being slaves and latter damaged more by being responsible for 70% of the crimes in the USA

>>18615491
If plantations were bad for the economy the North wouldn't have been so desperate to keep up the high tariff rate so it could share in the high profits of slavery. Sugar and cotton were plantation crops and not yeoman crops for a reason; they needed unpaid labor to be profitable.
>>18615492
The South's export-heavy, mostly agrarian economy was an essential part of the pan-Atlantic economy on which all of the other nations depended; the Northern States most of all. One half of the country focusing on making industrial products and the other using agriculture to generate most of the profit from exports sounds like a fine model to me.

>>18615485
I don't know. I don't care enough about the imaginary bronze age sky daddy to read that shit.

>>18615498
They weren't committing 70% of the crimes when they were in chains, tard, and I just explained why your economic analysis is entirely based on emotion while mine comes from reading books. I can understand anxiety about having negroes in the United States, but your arguments are wrong, and they were almost completely confined to plantations before abolitionists fucked everything up.

>>18615512
The high tariff were a way to peceafully make the southerns abandon the plantation system you idiot, the north could never legally take away land from rich southerners so it created economical pressure

The USA would have money to send them back to africa if the idiots in the south didnt start a fucking civil war

>>18615471
Nah, slavery was awfully brutal in the US and that was the 'nice' part of the new world for an enslaved African to end up. The tropical sugar plantations were orders of magnitude more horrible than what went on in dixie land. Consider that today, there are roughly as many blacks and mixed blacks in the US as the entire population of the Caribbean islands despite the fact that the former region imported a fraction of the slaves the latter did.

>>18615471
Nobody ever apologizes for slavery of Native Americans, Indians, Germanics, Celts, Slavs, Turks, Jews, White Europeans, Greeks, Persians, Koreans, or Chinese, etc.. Thunk about that for as long as you need.

Like most people, I can't afford a slave and don't want to be a slave, so I think slavery is bad. Simple as.
People complain about illegal immigrants being cheap labor but literal slaves were way worse in that regard. The working man has every reason to detest slavery, regardless of the race of the slave.

>>18615538
>Native Americans:
https://www.cherokeephoenix.org/news/cherokee-nation-commits-to-freedmen-initiatives/article_820727de-cf38-11ee-8ef3-27801f5e8d4e.html

>Everyone else
They should

Slavery is not inherently racialized. Rival Mesopotamian warlords in Sumer would enslave the soldiers and civilians they captured in nearby city-states. These different city-states often originated only a few dozen miles from each other. These early peoples in bronze-age Iraq didn't know about different races, such as the Celts in the west or the Chinese in the east. The only killed, raped, and enslaved each other because they were competing for resources, not racial dominance.

Yet slavery still existed. It did back then and it still does today. And it affects all groups of people, not just African Americans. The Arabs and Ottomans enslaved white Balkan Christians. And Africans, too. Long before the Transatlantic slave trade emerged and for years after it ceased operating.

By that logic, white Christians and indigenous North Africans are both the oppressed class and should rebel against their Turkish and Saudi oppressors to liberate themselves, in unison, from this one-struggle.

Of course, that's complete and utter bullshit, as slavery depends on who the ruling class is in a certain region and who isn't. There is no universal "bourgeois slaver class." It's ultimately too complicated to be reduced to "uhhhhhh white people are le hecking bad ]lmao."

>>18615586
>There is no universal "bourgeois slaver class."
those who dont labor their time but instead employ others to do their labor through the privilege of private means of production

>>18615603
Wealth disparities and power imbalances transcend borders. But racial hierarchies don't.

Africans sold other Africans to Europeans.

>>18615615
doesnt have anything to do with what i quoted and said.

while slavery per se is not inherently racialized, in its application it is. early humans are always tribal and that means "us", with "us" being "not them" whether it be by creed or blood.

there shouldnt be a direct relation between being poor and going to prison but reality says that theres a proportional chance to it... poorer, higher. richer, lower.

crazy, huh?

>>18615630
the transatlantic slave trade was just one slaving operation. not all slavers were white. and not all slaves were african americans.

in the united states, sure. but the word "slavery" by itself transcends the united states.

this whole thread is very american-centric.

>>18615586
>By that logic, white Christians and indigenous North Africans are both the oppressed class and should rebel against their Turkish and Saudi oppressors to liberate themselves, in unison, from this one-struggle.
This is correct, emancipation begins with reverting to Christianity

File: soy-soyjak.gif (3.76 MB, 359x374)

3.76 MB GIF

Some of you are really trying to argue why slavery isn't bad?

>>18615725
OP here, I'm not supporting slavery; I'm just wondering why we still have forced labor in prisons as protected by the XIII amendment, which only abolished slavery in the form of owning people as chattels.

Slavery was pretty bad for the roman empire, it allowed the ultra rich land owners to outcompete local farmers via free labour and drive masses into relying on the grain dole or rioting.
I see no reason why this wouldn't happen with factories if they had those at the time.
It's obviously bad for the slaves but it's not as though the average man gets any benefit from their toil, the only exception would be if there's no unemployment and a lot of jobs available which hasn't been the case since the end of colonising America.

>>18615491
Plantations were the only way to make use of the surplus of slaves the North and the Founding Fathers had. The plantations' need for repeated cash infusions and the internal slave trade were what integrated the Louisiana Purchase into the Union's economy.

File: biased text books.png (55 KB, 304x183)

55 KB PNG

>>18615538
>Germanics, Celts, Slavs, Turks, Jews, White Europeans, Greeks, Persians, Koreans, or Chinese
Because those people abolished slavery and made it illegal rather than elevating it to constitutionally protected status by means of the 13th Amendment.

To all of those people, slavery is a crime rather than an option opened up if your prison happens to hold somebody who has been duly convicted for a speeding violation.

No it was banned before the trans-atlantic slave trade reintroduced it.

>>18615481
It's like that on purpose for free labour, the economy would be screwed without the free labour and be forced to take on even more illegal immigration for these low wage jobs.

>>18616155
Archeological findings have complicated the longstanding narrative of large estates displacing small farmers. Which is odd because every. Single. Contemporary. Source spoke of large estates displacing small farmers. Either way though, slavery begets inequality, and inequality begets autocracy.

>>18615586
In certain societies such as the Nuosu of China separate sub-ethnic groups even developed BECAUSE of generations of enslaving ingroup members