Best
826 Comments
Post
  • #114
    !
    Yup, very important to point out those happy times when she is just waiting for the next beating, but the slave had no alternative. No where to run. Nowhere to hide. No way to protect self or family.
  • #267
    !
    @WMCOL Just like most Americans today who don't realize they are
    slaves to big government and Washington, DC, is our Lord and Master. Try messing around and see how fast your supposed benefits will last.
  • #375
    !
    @SharonH Thank you, your opinion is appreciated. Hope you are sucked in by all the government giveaways that have made our country so lazy and indifferent to reality. Reality tells me if I work I eat, if I pay insurance my health is taken care of and so it is. My wife and I do this on nothing but SS and we ask no free entitlements for doing nothing for our society or our country!!! Iay down with this liberal give away program that the country is going bankrupt because of its' gross mismanagement.
  • #378
    !
    She was always happy when "Massa" would tear her out of the arms of her husband, drag her into the woods, pry her legs apart and stab his penis in her vagina. She was so very happy.
  • R Load more replies

  • #48
    !
    "Anti-slavery propaganda!?"
    Seriously!!!???
    The author must be channeling some 19th century, southern ancester.
    Hey Bubba, it's 2014, not 1814!
  • R Load more replies

  • #19
    !
    I mean I hear they got fed Lobster. Seriously though.... WTF? I know this magazine doesn't speak for all conservatives, but when the "American Spectator" stands for your views.... it kind of makes the whole ideology look racist. It's not, but that author in particular really was.
  • #51
    !
    James Bowman is a movie critic for the magazine. I rarely listen to anything written by movie critics...they typically come across as out of touch.
  • #52
    !
    Actually at one time no one but the poor ate lobster. It was considered a trash "fish". Not the fancy stuff that goes with champagne and a bib.

    And my take on the biased article was that it portrayed all relationships as cruel and punishing. Can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, but I found this of interest:

    " But why these people could be so evil? I think the best answer for the question can be
    found in Inside View Of Slavery by C. G. Parsons who was a visitor from the North at
    the time of slavery. He wrote that the system of slavery influences the
    slaveholder, and its "...tendency to harden the heart, to dry up all the
    fountains of human sympathy, to make one callous to the wrongs and the woes of
    these around him, is stamped upon the very surface of society throughout the South"(Parsons 203).

    He found that denial in the slave owners considerable given the realities of the slaves existence. Are there exceptions to the rule? I am sure, but it is the rare exception.

    http://www.thehistoryconnection.com/Slavery-I...

    South"(Parsons 203).
  • #69
    !
    @Willozwisp The same can be said of the robber barons of the North, who worked their people to death while they lived in luxury. I just saw "The Men Who Built America" on H2 over the weekend and saw how Andrew Carnegie and Henry Frick treated their steelworkers in Homestead, PA. It was also Henry Frick's indirect actions that caused the Johnstown flood, which didn't bother him, but it did with Carnegie.
  • #87
    !
    The writer was not "making the whole ideology look racist.". He was just portraying the reality of The NeoConfederate Right. Christ, we still have Mitch McConnell and all good Southern racist Republicans attending the annual "Pretend Plantation Days" in the South every year to rub elbows with the mover and shakers in the RNC. It must be fun to dress as antebellum royalty, complete with blacks paid to dress up in rags, and speak in Slave english: "Yes suh, No Suh, and Mo' Tea Suh?" These people are sick, and there is no cure....this is why stopping Sherman was a mistake by the North.
  • R Load more replies

  • #3
    !
    The "happy slave" was spin by the slaveholders to justify slavery. we never heard their side of the story until they escaped, like in Frederick Douglas's case.
  • #194
    !
    According to the 1860 US Census,
    Only 1.4% of all American citizens owned slaves
    Only 4.6% of White Southerners owned slaves.
    However, 28% of free blacks in the Southern States owned slaves

    The first slave owner in America was a black man named Anthony Johnson.(1654)

    There were nearly 65,000 black Confederate soldiers and black loyals that served and worked in the Confederate forces, with some 13,000 engaging in full combat.(While they were not assigned to Infantry or Calvary, they did engage in direct combat just as SupportCom does today)

    The most overlooked artifacts depicting the Confederacy is the one that is most recognized; The Confederate Monument at Arlington Cemetery. If you look at the images engraved, you will see a Confederate soldier placing his child in the arms of a black woman as he marches off to battle and a black soldier marching in rank with White confederate soldiers. And ironically, this Confederate monument is the first monument in the United States that gave honor to any black soldier
  • #216
    !
    @O_S_Thomas btw owners often lied about treatment of blacks to keep them from running away and i'd imagine they did the same to inspire more oblivious blacks to their cause. So yes i grant you there may have been some slaves who picked the falsely lesser evil.
  • R Load more replies

  • #66
    !
    The idea that anyone really believes that more than a miniscule number of slaves were happy is delusional.
  • #90
    !
    Thank you for that, FRAPS. I don't understand why a lot of white folks just cannot say simply: "Yeah, we really f-ed up." And then let it stand, take responsibility, without ANY of their rationalizations, false equivilancies, weak political spin, and everything else that has been done to try and "soften" what happened with slaves and slavery in America.
  • #102
    !
    @Unfit2serve Slavery was not an American Problem. It was a world wide institution for millennia. It was disappearing in the industrialized world because automation made the slaves more expensive than the machines that replaced them. The US had the worst outcome of all countries that eliminated slavery in the 18th century.
    Slavery still exists today. It may be illegal here but that does not stop some people from keeping them.
    The automation that was responsible for freeing the slaves in Europe was done without strife.
    One must also remember that in the US slave trade there were many participants, including African kings who sold slaves, all kinds of merchant ship that transported them, northern bankers that financed them, etc. There were very few innocents.
  • #128
    !
    @Unfit2serve For sure, it would have been so much better if we picked our own cotton. America would be a much better place without you.
  • #195
    !
    @Unfit2serve
    Slavery for life came to America when a wealthy land owner named Anthony Johnson did not want to release his indentured servants after 6 years of servitude as required by law, so he sued in the House of Burgesses (SCOTUS did not yet exist) that since blacks were spared death by their own African government in exchange of servitude, that they were no longer people but property, and therefore may be owned for life. He won his case in 1654, bringing slavery for life and also becoming the first slave owner in America. Oh yeah, have I mentioned yet that Anthony Johnson was BLACK? It was the black race that enslaved the black race, yet it was the White race that freed them.
  • R Load more replies

  • #53
    !
    This is one of the dumbest comments I have ever read. Nowhere in that entire rambling was there anything resembling a coherent thought. I am not stupider for reading this, and may God have mercy on my soul.(That's paraphrased because I don't remember it exactly but you get the jist). For anyone to suggest slavery was anything OTHER than cruel is an idiot. People are not property as much as this guy would probably like to revert to that time period.

    "We are wondering, was Bowman equally aggrieved by the lack of happy Jews in Schindler's List?" This sums it up pretty well. I think they forgot about the lack of Happy American Soldiers during the Bataan Death March. Because there had to be some who were happy about it right? I mean, statistics and all?
  • #34
    !
    Conservatives are crazy with their so called "HAPPY SLAVE" Jesus wtf is wrong with these so called ppl I read this and I puked I literally puked!!!! Conservative's really think slaves were happy? What's wrong with them???? Slavery isn't and wasn't a joke it a huge stain on America!!! Not funny!! Stupid ignorant worthless TRASH MAG!!!
    Do me a favor read up on SLAVERY then write a true article or are you to stupid to read??
  • #110
    !
    No surprise here. We knew it all along. This just reaffirms what Conservative Regressives think about black people. They try to hide it but they can't because it's who they are at the core. They think of blacks as being subhuman and that they should be happy to serve them.

    This mindset is also why blacks don't generally vote for them in presidential elections.

    Go Hillary 2016!
  • #133
    !
    @WMCOL Then explain the Democrats during the Jim Crow era.

    Oh, and let's not forget Robert KKK Byrd. Racists come in all flavors, but the current Dem party is keeping blacks as slaves economically with welfare, ignoring the elephant in the room regarding the lack of the black family structure (nearly 3/4 of all blacks are born to single mothers), and poorly performing public schools that we keep throwing a never ending stream of money to, which is what you guys want.

    Hell, LBJ said “I'll have those n*****s voting Democratic for the next 200 years.[Touting his underlying intentions for the "Great Society" programs, LBJ confided with two like-minded governors on Air Force One]”

    I'll Dems credit for saying whatever needs to be said to keep minorities under their thumbs, while demonizing Repubs by calling them racists.

    This ONE guy is the exception, but if ONE is racist, the most/all are...in your book, right?
  • R Load more replies

  • #8
    !
    Yeah, there is no such thing as a happy slave... I know some slaves lived better than other but that does not mean they were happy. I Say 99.9% of Conservatives have no base in reality, they constantly spew bs that is less then factual. I don't know why on earth ANYONE would cry about not portraying slavery as positive, but leave it to a republican to talk about things they have no idea of... I'm really, really, REALLY getting tired of right wingers winning about EVERYTHING!!! They nit pick at things they have no chance of understanding. Nothing the president does is good enough. One day they call him a over barring dictator out to seez all control and then they turn around and call him weak. I'm tired of republicans just making things up and trying to find scandals where none exist. For the lIfe of me I can't understand why a stupid republican would say bengazi caused the Ukraine incident. How does three people getting killed in lybia bc republicans defunded security bugets cause the Russian government to "invade" the Ukraine? Can someone please explain that to me? I guess I just don't watch enough Fox News. Why are republicans calling for war? What do they want the president to do other than what he has already done? Why haven't republicans had enough POINTLESS blood shed? Is the Ukrainian incident worth starting world war three? Why on earth would anyone supports republicans who sent soldiers off to war over a lie to fight in two wars that did not have to happen? 9/11 was completly avoidable and that is a fact. Ole dick, Rumsfeld,bush and rice and Powell were all warned EVERY damn day for months before 9/11 by our own intelligence agencies and even warned by other countries intelligence agencies about 9/11 including iraq and Russia... Republicans are not happy about anything alps they want to do is harm the country to make obama look bad and that's the damn truth...
  • #12
    !
    "Yeah, there is no such thing as a happy slave... I know some slaves lived better than other but that does not mean they were happy." .......... and then you lost me. Talk about whining.
  • #54
    !
    @KyleMFb I'm not going to get into any topics of your comment other than the slavery..... This isn't a conservative/liberal thing. This is a moron/common sense thing. It takes a moron to actually suggest slavery could be portrayed as positive or that a slave is "happy" being a slave. Those comments show, I want to say ignorance, but I don't know if that quite sums it up.

    Maybe I'm not a dyed in the wool full blown Tea Partier, but I'm still a conservative in general. Please don't lump me in with the people who actually suggest slavery was anything other than disgraceful and an abomination.
  • #71
    !
    Kyle, do you have this same response to every post? Good lord! You have diarrhea of the mouth!

    The topic is the movie and you go off on this tirade? What the hell does Bush have to do with this movie critics stupid comments? Is is Bush's fault?
  • R Load more replies

  • #7
    !
    Being a slave sucked, I get that, but life in Africa was hardly a walk in the park. Besides other Africans traded the slaves to the mean ol' white guys.
  • #20
    !
    Well that being said life in Africa might have sucked, but assuming you didn't get traded as a slave and sent to America.... hey at least you weren't a slave. They got traded by Africans, but the Africans didn't decide how the slaves would be treated once out of sight that was left up to the "mean ol' white guys".
  • #28
    !
    That's true and it illustrates an important point.

    The Left can hate Christianity all they want, but without Christianity, we could easily still have slavery in the Western World. It was Christians in both Europe and America who led the charge to scrub slavery from the Western Hemisphere. It was Christians like John Brown who fought the hardest for abolition. It was Christians who formed the core of the new Republican Party back in the 1850's and nominated Abraham Lincoln to be their first Presidential candidate. It was Christian faith and Enlightenment ideals that have led to a world in which slavery is no longer tolerated.

    Now if we can just stop the Progressives from condemning so many descendants of American slaves to a life of serfdom. A life of government dependence, tied to section 8 housing and desperately waiting for Progressives to make good on their promises.
  • #42
    !
    @Bobolinsky there were many secular abolitionists. There were many christian slave owners. You cant claim one teumps the other. You only seem to be wanting to lay claim to the positive and overlook the negative. Point in fact, Jesus and the bible repeatedly endorse slavery.
  • #49
    !
    @Bobolinsky
    I find it odd to have "Christianity " and "enlightenment" used together in the same sentence. LOL
    Not a dig, just a personal observation.
  • R Load more replies

  • #280
    !
    Surprise surprise, two academy award voters admitting voting for this flim for the award even though they had never seen it.
  • #319
    !
    That happens every year at the Oscars for Best Film. Google it. With 6,000 members a few are going to skip a movie or two once in a while.
  • #85
    !
    There did have to be kind slave holders that did keep his slaves well accommodated. That did not split up families and did allow for the education of the slaves children. I am speaking of particular slave owners on Crowley's ridge that had a school house for the children of slaves and a school house for the white children. They were taught the same curriculum and were not considered slaves because their parents were. My poor ancestors of my adoptive parents worked the fields right along with the slaves. Their children went to the "negro" school. Both the whites and the slaves were paid, but the slaves had it better off because their owner paid for everything! A house, fuel for heat and to cook on; well, every amenity the owners had except for the large nice home and slaves of their own, but they did have a say as to what slaves to buy. They have nice clothes to wear when not working and plenty of food. They were allowed gatherings that included music being played, food and drinks(nonalcoholic). In truth, these were parties. They also went to church. Would they have preferred to not be slaves? Yes! Should they have preferred to be owned by different men to be their owners? Hell no! It's degrees of how slaves are held that this is taking about. We all know that any type of slavery is WRONG!!! But in that place in time in the U.S. that people held slaves; there were good men and bad men. The good men who held slaves that were the envy of the slaves held by bad men. Obviously, this is a tale of a bad man the bought kidnapped free black men! I have not seen the movie. I don't want to! I've seen and read enough about slaves! It just affects me too badly. If I do watch one, like this one, I will do so at home where I can cry all I want to and yell at the movie if I want to. Right now we have a 55" Sony smart TV. Soon we will be able to get a larger, better smart TV for the living room. No missing the theater experience without having to leave our home unless we want to see one on an IMAX screen. That's a 45 min drive to Memphis to the Peabody Place. Our theater is not good! BTW, I'm 1/2 black.
  • #67
    !
    But it does strain credulity to portray all masters as alike even though they were wrong to own slaves. Many considered themselves Christian and took slaves to church. Many convinced themselves black people would have died as slaves in Africa. They were probably right but still wrong. We never see the entire story. There was plenty of wrong beyond our shores.
  • #83
    !
    Sorry, but there is no way to justify owning another human being, no matter how hard they may have tried. It's wrong, it has always been wrong, and Christian or not, they KNEW it was wrong.
  • #129
    !
    @Denizen_Kate
    Exactly what I said. But the US fought the slave trade in the beginning. All masters did not beat and abuse slaves. That was already happening in Africa and worse, being honest. If Africans had not sold their slaves into slavery it wouldn't have been possible. That is also part of the story. And what about black slavery by blacks in Africa today? Women and children are treated horribly in some parts of Africa by people who care less than the worst of the old masters. If a story is told it should be complete.
  • #139
    !
    @catiz - Just the act of owning another person is a form of abuse, regardless of how well treated. And just because atrocities such as slavery (and worse) still happen today does not in any way excuse those who once did so in our country, or those who defend them. There is your complete story right there, IMO.
  • #213
    !
    @Denizen_Kate
    White men owned white women but we got over it because there's too much work to do. When black men got their freedom they did not give it to black women. And defending is different from looking at the whole story. We seem afraid to do that. That might take from the victim mentality many seem to want to hold on to. There is profit and power in that for black leaders.
  • #62
    !
    never hear about who sold the slaves in the first place, what gave the folks the idea to go to africa to buy them from other africans.
  • #65
    !
    also read about indentured servants who sold their services for the trip,was they also seen as slaves even though they sold themselves into it?
  • #109
    !
    @tomincali
    BIG difference between indentured servants and slavery.

    Indentured could buy their way out after a period of time.

    SLAVES could NOT.
  • #6
    !
    I'm sure that there were slaves whose masters took care of them when they were on their deathbed. I know the stories about farmers with much less than a plantation who owned a slave or two and they lived and worked more as peers and friends than owner and property.

    I get all that. Anyone who reads enough American History will learn that... However... If there was a guard at Plaszow Concentration Camp who didn't unnecessarily abuse the Jews but helped load the trains, would Steven Speilberg have been wrong if he omitted it from Schindler's List?

    So in conclusion... WTF?
  • #4
    !
    And the American Spectator actually PAYS James Bowman to write for them? Boy are they getting ripped off.
  • #1
    !
    I find it very disturbing that anyone would want to see the 'happier slaves'. I mean, if you seen a group of happy slaves, would that change your view on what slaves as a whole went through? Would it broaden your mind or make you see things differently? I just. Ugh.
  • #190
    !
    Gather around for a history lesson...

    Slavery for life came to America when a wealthy land owner named Anthony Johnson did not want to release his indentured servants after 6 years of servitude as required by law, so he sued in the House of Burgesses (SCOTUS did not yet exist) that since blacks were spared death by their own African government in exchange of servitude, that they were no longer people but property, and therefore may be owned for life. He won his case in 1654, bringing slavery for life and also becoming the first slave owner in America. Oh yeah, have I mentioned yet that Anthony Johnson was BLACK? It was the black race that enslaved the black race, yet it was the White race that freed them.

    The Union offered to pass a Constitutional Amendment to forever protect the right to own slaves if the Confederacy would return to the Union.
    In his first Inaugural Speech, on March 4, 1861, President Abraham Lincoln approved a Constitutional Amendment that would guarantee permanent slavery in the United States. Lincoln stated in his Speech, "I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. Holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable."
    The Northern Permanent Slavery Amendment (aka Corwin Amendment)read,:"No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State."
    (In contrast, the Confederacy offered to abolish slavery in exchange of being recognized as an independent Nation by the Union, England and France).
  • #269
    !
    wow you're just self gratified aren't you?

    Yet you miss the entire moral and ethical argument. Why and how can one human make the decision to enslave another? No human voluntarily would subject themselves to be owned and treated as livestock. The same problem of human subjugation exists today, only we call it human trafficking.

    So you can sit on your rationalizing black slavery arse or, join the 21st century. By the by, you missed the one about Irish slaves.*snicker*
  • #609
    !
    I loved reading your decidedly skewed, and entirely untruthful history lesson. Maybe you've never heard that history is often dictated by the victor. Maybe you'd also like to reconcile the record given by one Eloudua Equiano, one of this country's first slaves, who was captured and owned by whites, and preceeds the date you cite. Maybe you'd also like to reconcile the issue of the US judicial code not giving blacks any rights in a court of law until well after that same cited date. In the future, dig deeper than the books found in our public school system. Yes, those books that are still published by the families of former slave owners. Check that history.
  • #751
    !
    @Rhemawrd
    Did you mean Olaudah Equiano? He was born in 1745, nearly 90 years after Anthony Johnson acquired full ownership of John Casor (who was the 1st slave in the American colonies).

    Also, you may be interested to learn that there was no US judicial code at all during the period of Anthony Johnson or Equiano. The United States did not yet exist.( Equiano had long lived in Britain before the US was founded).
  • #758
    !
    Yes, Equiano was a slave in Europe prior to reaching these shores. But if you want to dance around the mulberry bush, we can since his accounts of the events he describes can be traced back to at least 1562. Do you know what happened then? Maybe you'd like to look into Sir John Hawkins and his ship. Let's not play semantics about when America existed. The truth is lifelong slavery took place on these shores long before any court case you might wish to cite. The first American slaves arrived in Virginia in 1619. Even the US Constitution stated that slave trade could not be banned until 1808. Do again I say, your presentation is history, as written by the victor. You see proudvet, I've traced my own ancestry back through slavery, and even that preceeds your proposed date. You may want to include in the future, the first time a black man could sue a white man in a court of law in this country. So I do abhor history as told by the ancestors of the slave owners, rather than the truth told ny the ancestors of the slaves.
  • #772
    !
    @Rhemawrd
    Equiano wasn't born until 1745, and the 1st American settlers did not arrive until May 13, 1607. Therefor any recollection he produces about slavery in America in 1562 is nothing but pure fiction.
    America did have indentured servitude, and Whites, blacks and Asians were all part of this type of servitude. Essentially a person would agree to 2-6 years of servitude for exchange of a ticket to come to America.(This was very common among the poor and Anthony Johnson himself was such an indentured servant). Slavery for life did not exist in the American colonies until 1654 after Anthony's successful case at the House of Burgesses over the ownership of John Casor.(And this was a black man who sued a White man in court).

    Yes, the US Constitution did require the continuance of the slave trade until 1808 (Article 1 section 9). However, the Constitution was not even written until 1787,(some 20 years after Equiano moved back to London and 14 years after moving again to England).

    However, you seem to be leaving out a little "dark history" of Equiano. Why are you not mentioning the fact that Equiano and his family were slave owners themselves when they lived in Benin?
  • R Load more replies

  • #787
    !
    This movie should never have won an Academy Award. The acting was dry throughout the movie. And to give an award to Lupita was a disgrace to acting. She was not worthy of it.
  • R Load more comments...
Post