History of White Slavery in America

[Nie Trink Wasser]

If anyone is interested in reading about this topic I suggest getting a copy of this book (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684838648/qid=1049835204/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/002-5488061-0090448?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) and looking at the facts presented in it.

the historical significance of LEGITIMATE white slavery in America is very ignored. Most of these people were "indentured servants" from european countries whose debts were so great that their "masters" treated them much lower than the black slaves they have invested money in from africa.

please take the time to read about this neglected area in our history.


here's a sample : http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684838648/ref=lib_dp_TT01/002-5488061-0090448?v=glance&s=books&vi=reader&img=4#reader-link

[hgc]

Sounds like satire. You take this seriously?

[WildCat]

This (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0684838648/qid=1049835204/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/102-8364458-3964149?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) is obviously a sick joke.
Indentured servitude was a quite common way to come here back in the colonial days, typically the period was 7 years. It was taught to my class in the 3rd grade on up - I don't see how you can say it was neglected.

[Baggle]

I took American history, settlment through reconstruction last semester and I seem to recall my professor telling the class about how indentured servants would usually agree to be slaves of sorts for 7 years in order to get the boat ride across and then they would simply disappear once they got there most of the time. It's not like they were on chains or anything. Plus, indentured servants could go freely from town to town with nobody giving them a second glance. A slave would never dream of such a thing, as he would probably be arrested as soon as he showed up in town and could not produce his "free man's letter" or whatever it was they were required to carry.

-Baggle

[Nie Trink Wasser]

Originally posted by hgc
Sounds like satire. You take this seriously?

parts of it are satire and humor, because that's his style of writing.

My point is that the facts he references in this book are very hard to debunc, if not impossible.

so what Im saying is, take a look at this read what HE has to say in HIS book.

there may even be some excerpts online if you look....

[hgc]

Nie Trink Wasser:

parts of it are satire and humor, because that's his style of writing.

My point is that the facts he references in this book are very hard to debunc, if not impossible.

so what Im saying is, take a look at this read what HE has to say in HIS book.

there may even be some excerpts online if you look....
Yes, well there are facts and then there are "facts." Of course facts can be presented within a certain context, and are given a certain slant. For instance you said above that "white slavery" in American history has been ignored. First: most people I know wouldn't call indentured servitute "white slavery," since indentured servants entered into service willingly. Second: that it was "ignored" is not a NOT fact that I believe to be correct. Others have already addressed this. I haven't read any more than a sample page on Amazon, so I can't judge the book too much, but based on your take on it, and the presentation of what you think are facts, I'd say it's a load of crap spouted by a real wit.

[a_unique_person]

I think the thread on the American prison rates debunks this whole approach pretty quickly. Blacks represented way out of proportion to whites.

As for the lack of concern for the 'white trash', where is it? How many white trash have been lynched? Where were the signs on buses saying 'white trash up the back'?

[Supercharts]

Seems to be a problem elsewhere too.

"In the Northern Territory and Western Australia, mandatory sentencing laws demand automatic jail sentences for repeat property offences, no matter how minor. These laws specifically target the young, the poor and Aborigines. Nationally, Aboriginal adults represent 2 percent of the imprisonable population yet make up 19 percent of prison inmates."

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/nov2000/pris-n01.shtml

[Tony]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
I think the thread on the American prison rates debunks this whole approach pretty quickly. Blacks represented way out of proportion to whites.



Thats because blacks generally commit more crimes. The statistics prove this.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Supercharts
Seems to be a problem elsewhere too.

"In the Northern Territory and Western Australia, mandatory sentencing laws demand automatic jail sentences for repeat property offences, no matter how minor. These laws specifically target the young, the poor and Aborigines. Nationally, Aboriginal adults represent 2 percent of the imprisonable population yet make up 19 percent of prison inmates."

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/nov2000/pris-n01.shtml

These laws are a disgrace. The treatment of the native population in Australia is nothing to be proud of.

Despite many people at least wanting to have a formal apology to the aboriginals for the treatment they have received over the years, there is no sign of that coming from the current political leaders. John Howard is quite happy to feel sorry for Iraqis, (as long as they don't try to get asylum here), but not for his own people, many of whom end up suiciding in jail.

There was a story of a man jailed for taking a towel off a clothes line to use as a blanket being jailed, or of a boy stealing a packet of pencils being jailed, (who then suicided).

Unfortunately, this 'tough on crime', and 'three strikes and your in', has a lot of it's basis in American law, such as that used in California.

As in America, there has been much protest about what is seen as an iniquitous law.

It is well to get other countries to pick up on this aspect of Australia. If there is enough protest, John Howard and his friends might start to get the idea that maybe he should be looking in his own back yard for issues that need attention.

The idea that Australia is some paradise where there are no poblems is, of course, false.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Tony


Thats because blacks generally commit more crimes. The statistics prove this.

Is it that simple? I have met some Africans, there are black american basketballers out here. They don't seem to be doing drugs and drive by shootings over here. Maybe there are other factors at work besides the colour of their skin.

[Tony]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Is it that simple? I have met some Africans, there are black american basketballers out here. They don't seem to be doing drugs and drive by shootings over here. Maybe there are other factors at work besides the colour of their skin.

I never said they commited crimes because they were black, of course there are other factors. But the reason for the disparity between blacks and other groups in the prison population, is that blacks commit more crimes (in america).

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Tony


I never said they commited crimes because they were black, of course there are other factors. But the reason for the disparity between blacks and other groups in the prison population, is that blacks commit more crimes (in america).

Once again, it appears to be because they are black. Are there any other reasons?

In Australia, aboriginals are also present in prison out of proportion to their numbers. I do not believe it is because they are black.

[Tony]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Once again, it appears to be because they are black. Are there any other reasons?



Reread my post, I said.

I never said they commited crimes because they were black, of course there are other factors.

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by Tony
I never said they commited crimes because they were black, of course there are other factors. But the reason for the disparity between blacks and other groups in the prison population, is that blacks commit more crimes (in america).
If you have a source for statistical data to support your statement, please post a link. Otherwise it's just your opinion.

[susheel]

If you have a source for statistical data to support your statement, please post a link. Otherwise it's just your opinion.

I second that. And please make sure that the statistics are real statistics and not two numbers, like x number of whites committed crimes while y number of blacks committed crimes. I am talking proper demographics, properly selected sample groups...the whole hog.

[fishbob]

I seem to recall that there is a correlation between crime and poverty, lack of education, and lack of opportunity. These factors affect the American black population to a higher degree than the general population.

I also seem to recall a few posters around here that are pretty dead set against affirmative action because it discrimiates against white guys.

So should we try to solve the problems or not?

[Tony]

Originally posted by fishbob


So should we try to solve the problems or not?

Affirmative racism isnt the way. I would support affirmative action if it was determined on financial status instead of race, that would be a start.

After that we need to shun idiots like jesse jackson and al sharpton. They perpetuate the culture of victimization that is prevelant in the black community.

[Tony]

Originally posted by pyrrho2000

If you have a source for statistical data to support your statement, please post a link. Otherwise it's just your opinion.

These are statistics for homocide. This is all I could find on such short notice, im not writing a book report. :D

http://racerelations.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ojp.usdoj.gov%2F bjs%2Fglance%2Frace.htm

Racial differences exist, with blacks disproportionately represented among homicide victims and offenders

Blacks were 6 times more likely than whites to be murdered in 2000

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/vrace.gif

Blacks were over 7 times more likely than whites to commit homicide in 2000

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/orace.gif

The race distribution of homicide victims and offenders differs by type of homicide

For the years 1976-2000 combined -

Black victims are greatly over represented in homicides involving arguments or drugs. Compared with the overall involvement of blacks as victims, blacks are less often the victims of sex-related homicides, homicide by poison and workplace killings.

Race patterns among offenders are similar to those among victims, except that black offenders are involved in a relatively large percentage of felony-murders (nearly six out of ten).

[Lothian]

Does this mean (using the first graph) that currently 20 out of 100,000 blacks will be victims but only 5 out of 100,000 whites will be victims or

Out of 100,000 Americans there will be 25 victims (ignoring other races) of which 20 will be black and 5 white.

[BillyTK]

A few points:

Firstly, the assertion that Blacks generally commit more crimes (than whites) is unsupported by the statistics. This is because of the methodology used; for instance, homicide data is taken from the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports which is produced from data on crimes brought to the attention of the law enforcement agencies who take part in the survey. Admittedly, there's a lot of agencies taking part (17,000 city, county and state agencies accounting for 96% of the population of the US) but a crime has to be notified to these agencies before it is recorded and an arrest made.

All we can safely say is that Blacks are more likely to be involved in crimes which are notified to the police and for which an arrest can be made. This may be because of the type of crime being committed, but this is not the same as saying that Blacks commit more crimes.

Secondly, victim surveys are a little less problematic in that the data is collected from a sample of households rather than from official agencies, which means that data is based on experience of crime rather than crimes notified to official agencies. Because of the differing methodologies it is problematic to draw any conclusions between the two.

Finally, if we accept that over-representation of Blacks in jail is a cause for concern, then unless this over-representation can be explained in individual terms (i.e. there is a pathology which correlates with being Black that disposes Blacks to commit crimes which are more likely to be notified &c &c) then we've got to look at social explanations, which by their nature are external to the individual. But to do that would be to acknowledge there are aspects of their environment over which these people have minimal influence. Which would perpetuate the culture of victimization that is prevalant in the black community, as the new PC goes.

[Michael Redman]

BillyTK is right. There is no evidence that blacks commit crime at a higher rate, only that they are arrested, prosecuted, and convicted at a higher rate.

[specious_reasons]

I was taught in grade school, as were most others here, that white were also slaves, primarily as identured servants. "Song of the South", you know the Disney movie, even featured white slaves.

Although, I think that "primarily indentured servants" is whitewashing history a bit. I wouldn't doubt that there were large numbers of white slaves, especially before the African slave trade bloomed.

What I think an interesting question is, how many of the white slaves were from cultures that were considered "inferior" to the English settlers? You know, how many of the slaves were English, as opposed to Irish or Eastern European.

My suspicion is that slavery wasn't about "race", it was about breeding. Slave owners felt they were superior people. It was easier to justify African "inferiority" by skin color.

edited for spelling, typos

[fishbob]

Out of 100,000 Americans there will be 25 victims (ignoring other races) of which 20 will be black and 5 white. The stats mean that out of 200,000 Americans, half of them black and half of them white, there will be 25 victims. I am not vouching for the accuracy of these statistics, this is just how I read them.

[c0rbin]

idiots like jesse jackson...

"Idiots" like these risked thier lives so that blacks could do stuff like vote or walk down the street and not have to shuffle every time a white woman walked by.

:rolleyes:

[Ben Shniper]

Originally posted by BillyTK
A few points:

Firstly, the assertion that Blacks generally commit more crimes (than whites) is unsupported by the statistics. This is because of the methodology used; for instance, homicide data is taken from the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports which is produced from data on crimes brought to the attention of the law enforcement agencies who take part in the survey.


I don't think this is very logical. A guy posted his graphs, charts and facts, and you post a retort "Well, we only see the crimes that were reported!" Well, what makes you think that there were more whites murderred who went unreported than blacks? Or more white murderrers went unreported while more black murderrers got reported? It seems to me that if Police didn't care much about the black community, they'd spend less time botherring to report those murders than in white communities.

I don't see the ability of "underreporting and overreporting" to make up for a 7 to 1 disparity. That's a monumental amount of whitewashing that would need to be done. How could that go unnoticed?

I think it's more likely, if you wanted to use occam's razor, that something else besides "intrinsic flaws in the study" explains this disparity.

Don't ignore facts. If it is a legitimate fact that more blacks are in jail per population than whites, than it opens up the relative crime rate as a very legitimate response.

-Ben

[Tony]

Originally posted by c0rbin


"Idiots" like these risked thier lives so that blacks could do stuff like vote or walk down the street and not have to shuffle every time a white woman walked by.

:rolleyes:

So what, that was 35 years ago. Today he is a cancer.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Tony


So what, that was 35 years ago. Today he is a cancer.

what has he actually done wrong?

[Denise]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


what has he actually done wrong?

You're kidding now aren't you?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Denise


You're kidding now aren't you?

no.

[Denise]

Then there is no point in talking to you.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Denise
Then there is no point in talking to you.

???

I asked what is wrong with Jesse Jackson. There is no point talking to me. ???

[susheel]

The problem with any such study is that one would need to include many factors. First of all crimes that arise out of a socio-economic situation...poverty etc and the Reasons for said poverty.

Do Blacks have a greater propensity to commit crimes because they are intrinsically criminal? I guess the answer would be, NO! One example to illustrate this is that serial killers are predominantly white males. Then does this mean that White Males are intrinsically criminal. We can rest assured that there will be huge rush to find proof (an I am sure that it will be valid proof) against such a conclusion.

I have noticed that there is a tendancy to draw conclusions very quickly when it comes to black criminal activity without factoring in a lot of socio/economic parameters.

More Blacks in jails. Okay, I think the margin will be much less if you take into account the fact that a prejudice (shown to exist time and again) against accused Blacks in the legal system. Is this accounted for? Did Blacks have the same access to defence as their white counterparts? I am aware of the 'ideal' justice system in America. But is the 'ideal' reality?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by susheel
The problem with any such study is that one would need to include many factors. First of all crimes that arise out of a socio-economic situation...poverty etc and the Reasons for said poverty.

Do Blacks have a greater propensity to commit crimes because they are intrinsically criminal? I guess the answer would be, NO! One example to illustrate this is that serial killers are predominantly white males. Then does this mean that White Males are intrinsically criminal. We can rest assured that there will be huge rush to find proof (an I am sure that it will be valid proof) against such a conclusion.

I have noticed that there is a tendancy to draw conclusions very quickly when it comes to black criminal activity without factoring in a lot of socio/economic parameters.

More Blacks in jails. Okay, I think the margin will be much less if you take into account the fact that a prejudice (shown to exist time and again) against accused Blacks in the legal system. Is this accounted for? Did Blacks have the same access to defence as their white counterparts? I am aware of the 'ideal' justice system in America. But is the 'ideal' reality?

There is also the problem that if you are fined and cannot afford to pay the fine, then you go to jail. Blacks tend to be poorer than whites.

Tulia showed to what extent prejudice can work. Examples such as Tulia don't happen every day, but the cases where one or two blacks are stitched up are not ever going to be newsworthy such as a case like Tulia is.

[Tony]

Originally posted by susheel
The problem with any such study is that one would need to include many factors. First of all crimes that arise out of a socio-economic situation...poverty etc and the Reasons for said poverty.



What study are you talking about?

[susheel]

Studies similar to the one whose graphs were posted. Was that difficult to understand? I am sorry.

[Tony]

Originally posted by susheel
Studies similar to the one whose graphs were posted. Was that difficult to understand? I am sorry.

It wasnt difficult to understand, but this study is nothing more than raw facts (or statistics) about how crime (homocide in this case) relates to race. Thats all it was. To obtain what you are asking for would require additional research and I already said:

This is all I could find on such short notice, im not writing a book report. :D

[susheel]

That is precisely why I think it is inadequate. I did see your statement in the original post. But you are using it to illustrate a point of view and as such think it is valid.

[Tony]

Originally posted by susheel
That is precisely why I think it is inadequate.


Why are the causes of crime necessary in finding out who commits more crime?

The two are completely different subjects.

[susheel]

The Why IS very important. Rhetoric tends to make out that more Blacks are in prison because Blacks are intrinsically prone to criminal activity...it is in their blood, so to speak.

Why are more Blacks committing crimes? Socio/Economic situations. There are two ways to handle the problem. Take steps to improve the socio/economic situation or introduce a 'Hitler plan' as a solution to the 'conclusion' I mentioned in the first para. The choice is on the table and rises from how one looks at the situation.

[Tony]

Originally posted by susheel
The Why IS very important. Rhetoric tends to make out that more Blacks are in prison because Blacks are intrinsically prone to criminal activity...it is in their blood, so to speak.

Why are more Blacks committing crimes? Socio/Economic situations. There are two ways to handle the problem. Take steps to improve the socio/economic situation or introduce a 'Hitler plan' as a solution to the 'conclusion' I mentioned in the first para. The choice is on the table and rises from how one looks at the situation.

It is important, but I never said blacks commit more crimes because they were black. I simply said that blacks commit more crime, and I showed that with statistics. I never gave a "Why".

[susheel]

Yes I have noticed that. As a statement of fact it is true. But are you denying that this statement of fact could be taken to mean a great deal more? Perhaps the reason fo AUP's and even my own feeling that the statement you make suggests racism.

I will take it as given that you are not racist. But that statement evokes racism. I think it would be more correct to say that there are more Blacks in prisons in America.

[Tony]

Originally posted by susheel
Yes I have noticed that. As a statement of fact it is true. But are you denying that this statement of fact could be taken to mean a great deal more?

No im not denying it. I understand it could be taken to mean a great deal more.

Perhaps the reason fo AUP's and even my own feeling that the statement you make suggests racism.

Typical, you cant accept reality, so you assume racism on my part. Youve been well trained by the PC thought police.

I will take it as given that you are not racist. But that statement evokes racism. I think it would be more correct to say that there are more Blacks in prisons in America.

Im not interested in being "correct". Im interested in facts.

[susheel]

Please read carefully. I said that the statement seemed to suggest racism. I also later stated that I am assuming that you aren't one.

Now back to the facts...

'Blacks commit more crimes.'

In isolation what does this statement imply?

[Tony]

Originally posted by susheel
Please read carefully. I said that the statement seemed to suggest racism. I also later stated that I am assuming that you aren't one.



I apologize for my malicious tone, but I am tired of that pseudo-mccarthy mentality.



'Blacks commit more crimes.'

In isolation what does this statement imply?

I agree, it might imply racism. Thats why its incumbent on intellegent people like yourself to understand whats really trying to be said.

[susheel]

I too apologize for being a bit of a prig.

The problem is that intelligent people aren't thick on the ground. There are too many people who would see a statement like that and come to the wrong conclusion, maybe sowing the roots for a 'final solution'.

Though I feel that the concept of PC has taken on rather absurd proportuions of late, the original idea was good. Remove from rhetoric something that could be negatively or derogatively used or also used to oppress and harass.

One has to be very careful when one says something. While there are those who will assume as you thought I did that you are racist, there are also those more dangerous, who will take it as a confirmation of their own racist beliefs.

Remember the story of Thomas Becket and Henry II?

[Tony]

Originally posted by susheel
I too apologize for being a bit of a prig.
Though I feel that the concept of PC has taken on rather absurd proportuions of late, the original idea was good. Remove from rhetoric something that could be negatively or derogatively used or also used to oppress and harass.




In theory its good, but anytime you start regulating speech, you open an ugly door.


Remember the story of Thomas Becket and Henry II?

Enlighten me


You wanna discuss the root causes of black crime (and perhaps crime in general)?

[BillyTK]

Ben,

I don't think this is very logical. A guy posted his graphs, charts and facts, and you post a retort "Well, we only see the crimes that were reported!".

No. The lapse in logic is to interpret and generalise data without acknowledging the limitations of the methodology used. Remember, the assertion was that "Blacks commit more crimes"; not "Blacks commit more of a certain type of crime", or even (as is more likely the case) "Some Blacks commit more of a certain type of crime". The methodology used to gather data must be taken into account before interpretations are made. If the sample that the data is drawn from is limited, those limitations have to be acknowledged, otherwise any generalisation made is unsound. In this case it's only crimes that have come to the attention of law enforcement agencies:

Understanding Crime Statistics (http://cityofnewhaven.com/police/html/stats/crime/crimestats.htm)
UCR Limitations
There are inherent limitations in current crime reporting practices. Of primary importance is the question of how much crime is being reported. The degree to which crimes are being reported varies from area to area. A considerable volume of crime is not reported to law enforcement agencies because the victims consider the offenses against them to be of little consequence or that the likelihood of apprehending the suspect is small. They may also fear retaliation from offenders, or in fact, be a participant in a crime (for example, a prostitute who is robbed).

Crime Factors
Because not all factors that have an impact on crime problems are measured or considered by the UCR Program, superficial conclusions are sometimes drawn from crime and arrest data, particularly when attempts are made to compare jurisdictions. Local ordinances and criminal justice administrative policies, record-keeping practices, and the degree of adherence to Uniform Crime Reporting standards all affect the number of crimes and arrests reported. Additionally, socio-economic conditions and the characteristics and attitudes of the local population influence the extent and nature of criminal behavior in a community.

As I went on to say: All we can safely say is that Blacks are more likely to be involved in crimes which are notified to the police and for which an arrest can be made. This may be because of the type of crime being committed, but this is not the same as saying that Blacks commit more crimes.

Well, what makes you think that there were more whites murderred who went unreported than blacks? Or more white murderrers went unreported while more black murderrers got reported? It seems to me that if Police didn't care much about the black community, they'd spend less time botherring to report those murders than in white communities.
I've made no such claims that more white murder/ers go unreported, or have given you any evidence to think that. That's a matter of your interpretation of my post, which is the whole point I've been making: in this case we have to be careful with interpretation of the data and acknowledge the limitations of how the data may be interpreted.

I don't see the ability of "underreporting and overreporting" to make up for a 7 to 1 disparity. That's a monumental amount of whitewashing that would need to be done. How could that go unnoticed?
Again, a reminder; the claim is that Blacks commit more crimes. My counter-claim is that the limitations of a study have to be acknowledge before any interpretation is made, not that these studies show by their absence of data that Whites are on the rampage and the police are ignoring it.

I think it's more likely, if you wanted to use occam's razor, that something else besides "intrinsic flaws in the study" explains this disparity.

Don't ignore facts. If it is a legitimate fact that more blacks are in jail per population than whites, than it opens up the relative crime rate as a very legitimate response.
-Ben

But we don't need Occam's razor when we know the limitations of these studies. And I'm not ignoring facts; it is a legitimate fact that Blacks are over-represented in jail populations; what is illogical and fallacious is to interpret this to mean that Blacks are committing more crimes. Like I said, all we can safely say is that Blacks are more likely to be involved in crimes which are notified to the police and for which an arrest can be made. This may be because of the type of crime being committed, but this is not the same as saying that Blacks commit more crimes.

[WMT1]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
what has he [Jesse Jackson] actually done wrong?

Originally posted by Denise
You're kidding now aren't you?

Originally posted by a_unique_person
no.

Originally posted by Denise
Then there is no point in talking to you.


:confused:

Am I missing something? Is this a reasonable response to a sincere question in a forum devoted to skepticism?