Were slaves really horrifically treated as bleeding heart liberals

See: Ancient Roman slavery.

>>369245
No, actually, some accounts say slaves enjoyed it. If they weren't productive it's because Africoons are lazy.

>>369245
Pretty much this. The worst cases of beating slaves were uncommon incidents. Also liberals strangely want to portray fiction as though it were real. Using Uncle Tom's cabin to represent slavery is not a very good idea.

>>369245
Malnourished? No, that would be idiotic.
Whipped, overworked and made to live like cattle? Definitely.

Slaves have guaranteed food and shelter.

>>369245
Some certainly were, and I'd guess the justification is similar to capital punishment, punish one to discourage others

I agree

Chattel slavery is completely ethical and if you disagree you're a Jew

Plantations were giant summer camps with movie nights

>>369245
You don't need someone to be at the top of their capabilities in order to have them pick some fucking cotton, especially when your competition is just other slavers having beat up nigs pick cotton.
So, the treatment of slaves will depend on what you want them to do.

That being said, if you don't think slavery is abhorrent in itself, I'm very much in favour of stripping you of your human rights and making you the property of someone who will fuck you up whenever you act up, but treat you well as long as you do what you're told, so you can see how you like that.

>>369245
Which slaves?

I you mean like American ones then it was very shitty. Not always physical many cases mental damage.

There is no such thing as a good slave owner. There is no such thing as a kind slave owner.

There is one kind of slave owner and that is one who owns human beings with the belief that they had a right to enslave them because of supremacy.

Stop.

>>369245
>methodological individualism

For fucks sake OP.

>>369279
I guess we can throw out the Gulags, Japanese Labor Camps, and North Korea as all that bad too.

File: Olaudah_Equiano_-_Project_Gutenberg_eText_15399.png (2MB, 652x1050px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 652x1050px

Olaudah Equiano said slavery pretty much sucked ass and that almost every day was hell. Even domestic slaves were tortured for disobedience.

He remembered Africa fondly

>>369274
>I don't like discussion

>>369245
Treating them badly doesn't make a lot of sense productivity-wise, both in the point you make and this: if you treat them like prisoners and beat them, they'll try to escape, that's just human/animal nature. If you treat them decently and feed them they won't try to leave, sort of like a pet.

You'd be hurting productivity and encouraging them to run away. Slave owners didn't keep them locked in cages, they lived in shanty housing units they could likely easily escape from, and some of them did. Those were the ones who were beaten, to deter them from running away again. Not the ones who worked, what would you be beating them to deter them from doing?

Psychological abuse is still abuse, no one willing stays a slave without it.

>>369303
>mai feels

So how many people, white or black, in all the hundreds of years of the institution, volunteered to be slaves?

Because I'd wager the number is approximately the same as the number of people who volunteer to be cooked and eaten.

Fredrick Douglas simply asked how whites would enjoy being made slaves

>>369245
Amerifats are trying to make the entire world feel guilty about their crime of slavery. Shit on you burgers

>>369287
>I guess we can throw out the Gulags, Japanese Labor Camps, and North Korea as all that bad too.

We dispose of the category of bad altogether and cease analysing history from the perspective of meritorious individuals.

Go eat a dog.

>>369318
>wahhh muh feels over reals

Get redpilled.

>>369329

Eating dogs is an integral part of my culture. You are committing a microaggression

>>369258
>Whipped, overworked and made to live like cattle?
Thats pretty rare outside of Serfdom, and what slavery turned into with industrial production past the industrial revolution.

And serfdom is still pretty expensive, since the serfs will still die of malnutrition, hunger, infections and beatings if they are treated badly.

>>369318
>in all the hundreds of years of the institution
More like, thousands.
And I'd say it's a lot, because economic hardship can produce desperate responses.
>>369323
>slavery was an american thing
Are you literally retarded?

>>369335
Way to conflate different social relationships in different societies over different times. Good job. You can feel like a cunt now.

>>369335
This "be nice to blacks because we Americans enslaved them" is something the US attempts to force on the rest of the world.

Most of the support for the abolishment of Zwaarte Piete in the Netherlands is the work of dirty Anglo-American press and Anglicised Surinamese traitors who have drunk of the North American social justice insanity.

>>369318
In late Republican Rome things were so bad in Greece (mainly due to shit governors and the Roman tax collection system) that many educated Greeks (mostly doctors) sold themselves into slavery because they knew that, with their skills, they'd likely go to Rome or some other large Italian city, where they'd be treated well, valued, and have a high chance to attain manumission (and the citizenship that came along with it).

>>369329
Well, if you don't like it, you can't say it's a bad thing that I do it.

>>369291
Olaudah was a slave who was born 40ish years after the Industrial revolution.
At which point the price of a slave had decreased to the point where they could be mistreated.

>>369303
Humans do also take very well to be treated like pets.
Inb4 some asshole strawmans that into "being treated like a dog on a leash".

>>369329
Well, if you don't like it, you can't say it's a bad thing that I do it, and you can't say my history is any worse for it.

>>369355
>Inb4 some asshole strawmans that into "being treated like a dog on a leash".
I suspect the number of people who want to be treated like a dog on a leash is way higher then the number of people who'd wnat to be treated like that.

>>369355
Those are what we call adult children and keks.

>>369356
>you can't say it's a bad thing that I do it, and you can't say my history is any worse for it.

Actually I can. I can accuse you of deep methodological failures, an inability to read texts correctly due to your methodological failures, historiographical dishonestly chiefly through anachronism, whig history, moralism and distortion.

And this is a lay down misere for you speaking historically. So make your choice, fuck off to >>>/x/ >>>/int/ or >>>/pol/ because lies aren't welcome here.

>>369339
The definition of slavery isn't complicated at all, and it is one of the longest-standing human institutions. I mean, where do you think the white slaves traders got their slaves, did they just hunt down some random africans? No, that would actually have been illegal for them to do, they had to buy every single slave they got from the existing african slave trade.
>>369342
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Slave_Coast
And that's not even the only instance of dutch involvement in slavery, kankermongol.

>>369342
It's black face, no less racist than Hajji

>>369359
Seeing the amount of people join Cults? Like Jonestown, or men who acquire harems occupying a GFs house to host the harem.

Being treated somewhat well, with some thought, is apparently very appealing.

>>369245

Of course not.

Anyone who has ever owned livestock would know that they're a huge investment and need to be cared for.

That Irishman working as an indentured servant though, fuck him he owes me money.

>>369318

>what is indentured servitude

>>369368
And slaves in Africa lived differently to the Carribean to the Rice slaves to the cotton slaves to the tobacco slaves to the house slaves to the northern slaves. And these to Arab slaves, or Chinese debt slaves (including those in the US on the railways and whore houses), to Greek Slaves to Roman slaves to Israelite slaves to Anglo-Saxon and Norman slaves, to Galley slaves.

>kankermongol
/int/ calls you.

>>369376
You honestly think only a SJW would consider slavery morally reprehensible?

>>369310
A lot of those testimonies "from blacks" saying slavery wasn't that bad, or that they enjoyed it, were actually written by white men.

Stop trying to find excuses for chattle slavery just because it makes you uncomfortable.

>reactionaries: not even once

If slavery wasn't so bad why did slaves learning of Union arrival leave en masse around Combahee river and set the plantations on fire?
>>369376

>>369380
So, because different slaver societies imposed different living conditions on slaves, it isn't fair to point out what they had in common, namely, slavery? What is your point even?
>>369385
>you will never make us admit to it
Admit to involvement in slavery? Are dutch people actually denying this?

>>369381

only an SJW would unironically end a post with

>Stop.

full capitalization and punctuation. Not to mention the sweeping moral judgments made out of a sense of superiority.

>>369393
>imposed different living conditions
>they had in common, namely, slavery

You're imposing upon the past, and your theoretical category is unargued.

>>369274
There is no such thing as a good pet owner. There is no such thing as a kind pet owner.

There is one kind of pet owner and that is one who owns animal beings with the belief that they had a right to enslave them because of supremacy.

Stop.

>what is mutual relationship, libcück

>>369385
No one uses Netherlands as an example anymore. Sweden, Denmark and Norway maybe but after Wilder NL got dropped.

Regardless it's racist and it will die soon enough, your protesters favoring Zwarte attacked a woman for protesting Indonesian occupation of Papua just because she was black.

>>369397
Domesticated animals and human beings are not the same thing.

>>369401
You are sorta right. Humans, like cats, do not take well to abuse as the core relationship mechanic.
Humans, like cats, do take extremely well to be treated like pets, and form rather deep relationships.

>>369245
Well here's the thing
They were not, sure they were mistreated to get back to work but the Master had to pay a sum of money to make sure they ate enough to work on the fields, to make sure they didn't die and to make sure they didn't fuck off

>>369411
The fact that you are comparing cats to animals shows quite clearly you're an insecure person unable to accept the uncomfortable reality of slavery

>>369318
During feudalism in Europe, many serfs pledged fealty to their kings. They were practically enslaved, made to farm and give the fruits of their labor to the king for distribution. Yet they weren't treated all that badly and were still able to have families and live with them, much like African slaves.

A good king is one you'd wish to pledge fealty to, a bad one is one who must rule through force. Being nice is a lot cheaper than hiring force. If a plantation owner wasn't a dick he could probably hire a few less overseers, and thus have more money to feed his workers. These people weren't stupid, they were businessmen.

File: 1444985626986.jpg (36KB, 426x361px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 426x361px

>SJWs, /pol/, and rational people caught up in the shitstorm

American plantation slaves, afaik, lived in overstuffed barracks, ate bread or porrige, and worked untill dark. Generally with a supervisor walking/riding around and shouting mildly abusive things once in a while.

>>369413
Learn about the sugar trade and profit.

File: Laughing_tiger.jpg (30KB, 500x322px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x322px

>>369416
>He equals pre modern slavery with industrial modern slavery
>He doesn't understand the differences between serfdom and skilled labor slaves either
>He thinks sugar plantations are representative to how slavery worked in most of history

>>369420
I thought we were talking only about black slaves in the US?

>>369401
Humans ARE animals, only a tad bit more complex. We still have the basic desires, needs, and emotions that a cat would have. We want to run away if we're in pain, we're indifferent if we're not. We will seek food if we're hungry, we will stay put if we are not.

Why would it make sense to beat and starve a slave?

>>369422
Not him, but this thread is about actual slavery not serfdom.

And actual slavery was a debasing and dehumanizing activity that is a blight upon our history.

If you do not agree, you should fuck off back to /pol/ instead of trying to make this board into /pol/ version 2.0.

>>369418
>herpaderpa well if you ignore a bunch of important details, and get your medievel history from French Revolutionary propaganda, and squint your eyes it's almost sort of like some one wanted this!

File: 56477848375.gif (179KB, 375x375px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 375x375px

>>369413
So humane the Igbo people were known to jump off the boats and into the ocean in their excitement at spending the rest of their lives on another continent to live as dogs

Or make it to america and accidentally hang themselves in their shacks to test rope strength for their benevolent masters

>>369428
You could have made a argument, but you didn't. Instead you are just parroting about 1 part of history: Sugar plantations in modern times

>>369427
So they would work.

>>369399
Denmark and Norway are just as bad as the Netherlands and Sweden is the country all three point to whenever their politicians need justification of why imbibing North American guilt politics is idiotic.

>its racist

Who decides? The jailor of Guantanamo and Abu Ghairab, the killers of Ferguson? Fuck you!

>>369422
Most people here are entirely unaware of the structure of sugar slavery or its death and replacement rates.

>>369431
Sounds to me that those guys had a personal problem and didn't die to actual factors of working as slaves

>>369396
Slavery is not a living condition, it is a legal relation between people, nhere on person is the property of the other. This is neither controversial nor complicated, everyone understands it. Except you, apparently.

>>369433
And apparently you can't read because OP has a picture from Django Unchained and is clearly talking about American slavery.

>>369443
>it is a legal relation between people
I like how you've just claimed that law is universal and identical.

>property
Doesn't change meaning in different social contexts, oh no.

>This is neither controversial nor complicated, everyone understands it. Except you, apparently.

It is deeply controversial, and complicated, apparently you haven't read anything after Aristotle, if you've read at all.

>>369427
You don't understand the actual horrors of slavery beyong whipping and that is very sad

>>369447
You should read it, it reads:
>How can a beaten, malnourished, neglected and depressed slave be any productive? Won't that actually be bad for the slave owner and his profits?
Which is then summed up as:
1. Beaten, malnourished and neglected slaves where uncommon before modern times, because they cost too much

2. For modern slavery, it would still be less effective than a small improvements in their tools, which would increase the harvest rate almost a tenfold

3. It was still done like that because price of slaves collapsed to the point where the richer plantation owners could afford fun terror reigns

>>369458
>Beaten, malnourished and neglected slaves where uncommon before modern times, because they cost too much

How can they have cost to much when slaves where for most of history the spoils of a conqueror?

Just because the American legal system introduced slavery into the general system of property rights, does not mean that this is how it has been for most of history.

i.e see the Vikings and their slavery.

>>369450
Protip: if the only way you can argue your point is by going into relativism overdrive, you might not have a point.

Now, systems of law are not identical, but the concept of law itself has to be, otherwise we couldn't be talking of different legalmsystems in the first place.
One good example is indeed the notion of property, which is, as Hegel pointed out, the fundamental unit of law.

What you're basically arguing is that because different actions were regulated differently in between historical legal systems, it is impossible to point out what they have in common, no matter how simple to identify.
Which leads me to my final question, are you even serious?

>>369454
Yeah just like I understand the horrors of the holocaust and jews being turned into soap and lampshades.

Abolitionists made up a lot of stories to get slavery banned just like jews made them up to get Israel. The narrative pushed today still claims slavery was so horrible and terrifying because blacks want more money for dem programs and reparashuns.

>>369463
Because at some point the war is over, and you sell them.
If they are good looking, you still need to feed them enough to avoid malnourished them, to fetch a high price.
Going by how it worked, the pillaging was usually far worse than the enslavement.

Secondly: The person buying a slave, is going to need something for the slave to do. The slave literally needs a part time job.
On the top of that, farming was too manpower intensive for slavery to be a way of supplying that.

It really depends. Domestic slaves could be treated as members of the family, while slaves who worked at sugar cane plantations would have ridiculously high death rates because working conditions were extremely bad.

>>369475
Again. Explain the reality of thousands of slaves running to Union lines, Combahee and the celebrations in Texas as soon as Abolishment was known?

It's not propaganda. The fact that families could not be separated, marriages had to be respected, education could be a reality, wages could be made and the abuses sexually, emotionally and spiritually could no longer occur is for a extremely religious people important thing.

It's more than literal beatings, why the hell do people base the treatment of slaves soley on that.

>>369481
Domestic slaves were not treated "better" they worked at the whim of owners regardless of the hour and had the highest chances of rape.

>>369245
See: Frederick Douglass's autobiography for a detailed account

Assuming you are talking about racially based slavery in the United States, it really depended. They were treated mostly like children, and the main concern with slaves was making sure they did not take control of their own lives. Were they beaten? It was considered unnatural for a slave owner not to beat his slaves regularly. Malnourished? Sometimes. It does seem counter productive, but not all slave owners were particularly bright, and the whole institution was wildly unorganized, with people with no idea how to own a slave finding themselves inheriting them. Neglected? They were under constant supervision of overseers if thats what you mean. Depressed? Sometimes, but only if they were specifically targeted, or were aware of any way out. Happy slaves tend to rebel less.

In ancient times, there were also skilled slaves, not just farm hands. Buying a slave was often to appreciate their talents. You could buy a slave tutor, a slave doctor, a slave musician, a slave dancer, a slave cook, a slave servant (even these were not beaten so much in American slavery).

The person was sometimes selling their services to the highest bidder as permanent employment.

>>369465
>Protip: if the only way you can argue your point is by going into relativism overdrive, you might not have a point.

If your argument is that transcendental categories exist you belong elsewhere.

>but the concept of law has to be
This isn't an argument from external reality. It isn't an accident that I mentioned Aristotle.

>
What you're basically arguing is that because different actions were regulated differently in between historical legal systems, it is impossible to point out what they have in common, no matter how simple to identify.

Firstly, you haven't. Secondly, slavery isn't simple. Forced manumission in leviticus differs radically from chattel slavery. As does Anglo-Saxon slavery.

>Which leads me to my final question, are you even serious?

I remember a very well received set of ideas that inspired historians precisely about property forms being different throughout history being central to twentieth century historiography.

>>369497
>rape

You don't know female sexuality, do you? Slave girls yearned for "mastah' cock.

>>369501
>If your argument is that transcendental categories exist you belong elsewhere
Again, if your argument regarding slavery hinges on accusing the opposition of taking the wrong stance on universals, fuck off and find a better argument.
>Forced manumission in leviticus differs radically from chattel slavery. As does Anglo-Saxon slavery.
I never claimed otherwise, and I don't think anyone else did. If however, as you seem to believe, these things have nothing in common whatsoever, how can you even list them like that to make any point?

As far as I am concerned, what sets amarican slavery apart from from other historical forms of slavery is that it emerged under socio-economic conditions that had made slavery obsolete, and this paradoxical nature explains the specific traits of this particular instance: slavery under conditions of universal abstract equality before the law will of course be different from slavery embedded into a rigid social caste hierarchy. Still, both are easily identified as slavery, and stop pretending otherwise, you are doing so yourself.

Oh, come on, we disproved all this nonsense with Fogel and Engerman.

In short, yes. They were.

Maybe not fight to the death with a claw hammer as in Django, but overworked, underfed, regularly sexually and physically abused, definitely.

The only thing I've found not to be entirely straightforward is pointing to slave's lack of consumption of milk as evidence for their being underfed, since most West Africans and descendants of West Africans are lactose intolerant.

But still, they were underfed.

>>369579
I'm sorry, but claiming that transhistorical categories exist mean that we cannot take you sensibly as a historian.

You directly claimed otherwise when you claimed that law was transhistorical.
>How can you list different things.
With language, even with semi-colons.

>pretending otherwise
Oh for fucks sake, try Banaji (2010) Theory as History. It won a Deutscher prize. The things you elevate (without knowing) to theory aren't valid.

Didn't Rome at its peak have like 40% of Italy be slaves?

>>369599
>claiming that transhistorical categories exist mean that we cannot take you sensibly as a historian
>we
>take you sensibly
Eh, I'm not sure I'd even want to be 'taken sensibly' by whatever collective you claim to represent, but law, as in, codified rules of conduct, exists as long as civilization. Does that make it transhistorical? No, since civilization itself is a thing with multiple beginnings and multiple ends.
>With language, even with semi-colons
Which is meaningless if you simultaneously reject the categories you use.
>It won a Deutscher prize
Appeal to authority much?

>>369618
I eagerly await seeing your well received monographs, because with the false sense of superiority you have, you must be about to be featured in AHR.

>>369622
>even more appeal to authority
We got a master debater right there.

>>369245
Slaves leased out to industries and construction by their owners had the most difficult time, since the people they leased them to would drive them harder and be more brutal than if they owned them directly.

>>369630
Yes friend, it is called disciplinarity. If you want to reject it, feel free to post on >>>/x/.

It depends on the place and the type of slave.

A Greek slave under a Roman family would be treated quite well with a lot of liberties, he would educate his masters children and perform other duties like sorting out taxes and the like.

Whereas a Gallic prisoner of war would probably be sent to some horrific mine and worked to death under a whip.

File: 20120228-WaterwheelsSp.jpg (23KB, 389x382px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 389x382px

The Romans, with their engineering mastery, had a system of underground waterwheels called "Reverse overshot Waterwheels".

Essentially several waterwheels were lined up, possibly nearly vertically, and when they rotated, they scooped up water, and passed it onto the next wheel, which did the same until it reached the surface. This was a giant pump essentially, to get water up from underground lakes.

However you have to consider how it was powered. It was powered by slaves, walking alone the wheel, as it rotated, like steps, like a treadmill. Perhaps 10 on each wheel, would stand in one spot stepping onto the next step, to continue rotating the wheel.

They had to do this for perhaps 14 hours a day, if they got tired, or slipped and fell, they either fell into the water and probably drowned, or fell into the mechanism and got mangled to pieces. At the sides of the wheels you also had men whipping you to go faster and maintain speed.

The turnover rate for slaves was extremely high.

There was a nice little video graphic of this but i can't find it.

Pic related is the layout.

>>369682
They were white slaves, probably Germanic. If you automatically imagined them as black you're a racist and brainwashed with the narrative.

>mfw I did it too
Those pesky jews and their programming...

>>369862
That's just you being retarded, anon.

>>369594
Nah slacker owners were good boys. They dindu nuffin. They just tried to civilize them their Negros with work and language

>>369862
I didnt say they were black, i was imagining Celts but really they could be anybody.

>>369682
Medieval folks developed wind or water powered pumps for this that didn't involved people dying.

Probably because people were paid to do that kind of work rather than being sent there as slaves.

>>370083
Exactly. Slavery is bad for society because you don't bother to invent anything if you have slaves to do it for you.

They say necessity is the mother of invention. That's not true.

Laziness is the mother of invention.

It's wasn't as bad as the Narrative likes to make it seem, but it ranged from "displeasing" to "incredibly sucky".

>>369245
How could a beaten, malnourished, depressed horse be any productive?

You initially break it in, get it accustomed to its environment, show it how to work and provide it with reinforcement or punishment, and shape it to how you want it to work. You then take care of it so it works to its full abilities, but still punish it if it is disobedient.

>>369245
>bleeding heart liberals
Into_the_fucking_garbage.jpg

>>369862
I imagined homer simpson

>>369245
Nobody likes to work for nothing. Because of this, the threat of violence (and actual violence when the threat is not heeded) is generally used to keep slaves in line.

>>369513
>says the guy who learned all he knows about sex from porn

>>369401
This. If I walk around unarmed with my dog, he won't try to escape or hurt me.
That should say something about pets and slaves being different.

>>369646
>disciplinarity
>literally not a word
Top kek

File: fffd.jpg (16KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 320x240px

>>369431
>excitement

>>369498
This seems to make sense.

>>369274
>Stop.
From this entire post I can tell you are some dumb female cunt from reddit.

>>369245
Not nearly as badly as white men are treated in today's insane SJW world. I would gladly trade places with a black "slave" in the 1840s.

>>369371
I can imagine that you'd be hard pressed to find a million or two people who would enjoy that and considering those numbers wouldn't even reach the 1% mark of humanity I think it's fair to agree that almost all people do not want this.

>>369268
sounds reasonable tbqh

just think of this in terms of horses, dogs and other useful domestic animas
yes, slaves were domestic animals. as such they could only have been productive when healthy, but also punished strictly when done something wrong
however any slave being sick was an ECONOMIC burden. killing any of them is a loss. not to mention that there would be owners that would actually treat their slaves like family, like we also treat our dogs and horses as family
of course there would be sadist owners who would mistreat their domestic animals, and also the "free" paid servants, and even their own families. didn't have to do much with slavery but with psychopathy itself

I don't understand why we hold the past world with today's standards at all

Once again /pol/ distributes of logic and reason showing that slavery ain't so bad and slave ownahs dindu nuffin based on wild speculation, pseudo-economics, and muh feels. We thank you.

>>370403
-->>370398

>>370398
Most people disageeed with Slavery even then.

>>369364
But you can't say any of those are "bad things" or that there's a problem with me doing those. Even if I know all of these things, and agree with them, you can't categorize the behavior of distorting history as bad.

I however, am able to accuse you of deep methodological failures, an inability to read texts correctly due to your methodological failures, historiagraphical dishonest chiefly through presentism, whig history, moralism and distortion.

>>370087
No. I am the mother of invention.

>>370398
Because we're not limp wristed, liberal, anti-intellectual relativists.

>>369245
beatings were used to get people to work, malnourishment was rare in the US but common in brazil where they had to ship in new slaves in order to keep the population up because it decreesed faster then the slaves poped out kids

>>369245
Depends if the slave was Irish.

>>370398
This
>>370431
Also, because even if you reject the idea of using universal standards you can use implicit universalism consistently, by using the position of the time and judging who was more correct.

Just as we can look at the Italian General Staff at the eve of WWII saying war would be fought with "Rifles, donkeys and a few machine guns" and look at what the American General Staff was planning and say 'Yes, the American Army had better generals, their assertions proved to be correct with time' it stands to reason that we can look at the position of the abolitionists and those in favor of slavery at the time and say 'Yes, abolitionists were right on virtually every aspect of slavery. In the fullness of time, we can see that they were correct, and those in favor of slavery were, at best, disconnected from reality."

>>369862
I imagined them white because of Conan.

>>369418
You have no idea what feudalism is and need to swallow a .45 bullet

>>369428
No one is trying to hijack /his/ other than you faggots. I swear /lit/ retards are trying so hard not to become /pol/ that they've turned this place into a shitty /lit/ hugbox.

>>370354
I can recreate that for you. You could even be a house nigger.

>>369245

Why are Americans so obsessed with their slavery?

>>369318
It depends, lots of them into a level were Greece was being depopulated from his young folk for pay debts or get Roman citizenship.

File: 800px-Cicatrices_de_flagellation_sur_un_esclave.jpg (171KB, 800x1325px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 800x1325px

Pfft nah it wasn't that bad.

>>370828
Victim complex. Seriously.

>>369422
>Laughing_tiger.jpg
That's a cheetah.

>>369450
I know this is an anonymous imageboard, but why be patronizing?

File: duck.gif (616KB, 175x170px) Image search: [Google]

616KB, 175x170px

>>371841
>falling for the bait

>>369245

Before the International ban in the early 19th century, it was pretty common that slaves would be beaten to death. Obviously it would depend on the owner themselves, though I remember reading of some British guy in Jamaica who would make one slave shit into another's, then sew their mouth shut as punishment.

Post slave trade ban in the states meant they had to be treated slightly better as a rule of keeping your "product". Though you could still be beaten pretty badly for the smallest things, while the guy on the next camp gets fed well and is allowed to go to church every Sunday.

There's far too much variation in this to say slaves were treated one way or the other, the only thing we can say is that despite all of it they were property, and anything could have been done to them by their owner.

>>369397

A) people and animals are different

B) my relationship with my cats doesn't really have much in common with slavery. They're outdoor cats, so they're technically free to go whenever they want, nothing is stopping them. I also don't force them to do any work for me.

File: Im out of here.gif (2MB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x300px

>>371874
> Duck

File: 1447613245759.jpg (85KB, 641x626px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 641x626px

>>371874
how does a flat duck bring pain of any kind?

File: fedora5.jpg (5KB, 279x181px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 279x181px

>>369268
>That being said, if you don't think slavery is abhorrent in itself, I'm very much in favour of stripping you of your human rights and making you the property of someone who will fuck you up whenever you act up, but treat you well as long as you do what you're told, so you can see how you like that.

>>371877
>a slave worth thousands of dollars was beaten to death
no.

>>369245
My mom used to work in a Nestlé factory (we're in the US) and she said they were pretty much slaves. People would regularly pass out while working. So no, you don't need to be 100% to be able to make someone else money. I'd imagine if the laws were 18th century tier and she wasn't considered human it could have been even worse.

>>371884
>people
definition of what is 'people' changed with time. deal with it
you cannot change the past, only learn from it

>>372339
even million-dollar worth cattle get put to sleep if something's wrong with a single cow. it depends

>>372320
males are venomous

File: happy-slaves-jpg.jpg (45KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 400x300px

>>371723
>believing Jewish libtard propaganda

How fucking retarded can you be to still fall for this shit after all these years. Pic related is more typical. They would work for a bit and then enjoy free time with family and friends while living on the plantation for free. An overworked slave is a useless slave. Slave owners had to keep morale high to keep tobacco and cotton production high.

File: crack.jpg (97KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 400x300px

>>372382
>Slave owners had to keep morale high to keep tobacco and cotton production high
methods varied among owners though
you think it was unusual that slaves were whipped? see how a racehorse is treated NOWADAYS

>>372368
proofs?
There is much more wealth in today's societies. A thousand dollars is huge in those times.

>>372406
>stylized art is now accurate depictions of history
no.
It was not regular for slaves to be whipped.

>>372406
Did you not see the picture I posted? Do those slaves look malnourished and depressed to you? No. If they were really treated as badly as libtards want you to believe then you wouldn't ever see pictures like that, only of them getting whipped while picking cotton for the 20th hour that day.

>>372418
it depends on the owner, i said already. and other economic factors like the disponibility of fresh slaves

>>372409
>proofs?
what do you think this is, /pol/?
just use common sense
it's not probable that slaves were treated neither worse than vermin nor better than housepets

>>372435
I disagree, slaves were treated more like a paternal relationship.
It is not in good incentive to treat your slaves improperly.
>just use common sense
this is not any sort of evidence. Slaves were rarely beaten to death by their owners, and whipping was not a very common occurrence for the vast majority of slave owners.
>it depends on the owner,
I assuming were talking about US slavery. because there is even less incentive with the ban of the slave trade.

Let's get this out of the way
All non-caucasoids are perfectly fine to enslave

And no slaves were not as horribly treated as shown in Django and Libkek fantasies.

They got all their essentials, shelter,food,clothing.

And no they weren't whipped for doing absolutely no reason for the lulz.

>>372525
>All non-caucasoids
not what ancient romans and muslims thought tho

>>372479
>I assuming were talking about US slavery
no, i'm saying it in general. not every slave owner was particularly cruel as also not every slave was treated like dogs nowadays, making them sleep in the owner's bed (unless it was a hot sex slave, but even then it wasn't cool with the rest of society)
>there is even less incentive with the ban of the slave trade
indeed, there's a before and an after the boom of slave trade. also besides slaves there were paid servants who had it from good to very bad. most of the freed black people still worked in plantations, only that they were punished with no pay instead of caning

>>369245
In most cases, no. In some cases, yes and it was bad for profits but some people are just sadistic and don't care.

What about slavery as a punishment for committing a crime? Would they be treated less ethically or be assigned a more harsh task such as mining rather than something less tiresome like a servant?

>>369245

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/23

>>370621
Same. Good film.

>>372565
When slavery ended impoverished Southern states could not afford prisons so they leased them out to private firms which then became profitable so many people mostly blacks were arbitrarily imprisoned to fufill these demands. Slavery but it was pretty exploitive.

>>372612
Shit sorry it wasn't slavery but it was exploitive I mean.

It depended on the slave owner. Some were sadistic and cruel, some were nicer and cared for their slaves properly, but all of them cared about exploiting the labor to turn a profit.

>>372565
The top example I can think of with Penal Slavery is China. De Jure: its the second of the 5 levels of punishment, just below the last one (death)

There are two types
-Debt/Tax slavery, where you become a corvee laborer to pay off your debt to the state.
-Frontier Service, you convict-soldier now, enjoy the Steppe/Tibetan/Vietnamese outposts.

Debt tax slavery sucks major balls but people made lives with the supposedly worse form of penal servitude that is frontier posting. People who went there actually stood a chance of being promoted, not to mention gets to settle in free land. It only sucks when Nomad raids happen- which is why its a fate just below death- but from their fortresses, they can deal with it

Plenty of villages along the great wall were descended from Penal Soldiers settling down and making the land for themselves

File: crikey.jpg (8KB, 304x166px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 304x166px

>>372642
>were descended from Penal Soldiers settling down and making the land for themselves
hmm
sounds like a certain island in the Southern Seas

>>369274
>>>/tumblr/

>>369245
Owning another human being as property is disgusting and abhorrent regardless of how they are treated.

That said, American liberals need to mythicize the suffering of slaves and the cruelty of their owners because they actually don't find the concept of state-endorsed, human ownership that offensive on its own. The self-incriminating, racial narrative is far more important.

>>372817
>say something stupidly irrelevant
>then say something factual
make up your mind, are you shitposting or not?

>>369274
Take your fee-fees back to tumblr. This board is for discussion, and this thread is for discussion of slavery.

>>369594
>most west africans are lactose intolerant

TOP KEK, post source or gtfo

>>373175
He's right, drinking milk as an adult is pretty much exclusively a caucasoid thing.

>>373202
Drinking milk as an adult is pretty much exclusively a retarded thing. Do you wear diapers too? What the fuck.

>>373232
Non-white detected. You're not supposed to drink your fucking mom's milk, not even human milk. Cow milk is great.

>>373232
Now what are you, a jealous nig, a butthurt lactose intolerant due to mutation, or some vegan hipster? I already know you're inherently unlikeable, but I'm curious why that is.

>>373202
neither of you have posted any sources, god this board is fucking shit.

>>369274
Except in cases like Thomas Jefferson and Robert E. Lee, laws prevented them from just letting their slaves go, like they wanted to do, so they treated their slaves kindly.

Also, you did have some slave owners who were against slavery, and would buy as many slaves as they could just for the purpose of keeping them away from dangerous work or bad lives, and letting them sustain themselves in their own community on their master's land.

ALSO, not all slavery was on a basis of a feeling of supremacy Fuck sake, reddit, stop using may mays as a source of your education and actually research this shit. I bet you also think Europeans started slavery and/or had the most influence on it, huh? How wrong you would be...

>>373281
You can just google this shit, anon.
http://www.foodbeast.com/news/map-of-milk-consumption-lactose-intolerance-around-the-world/

>>373361
>virtually the whole country is lactose intolerant
>european levels of milk consumption
Kek, what the fuck do those sudanese think they're doing?

>>373383
Milk intolerance covers a wide array of side-effects. The average milk-intolerant person just gets gassy from drinking it.

>>373281
All it would have taken is a quick look at wiki to see

>Several genetic markers for lactase persistence have been identified, and these show that the allele has multiple origins in different parts of the world (i.e. it is an example of convergent evolution).[1] The version of the allele most common amongst Europeans is estimated to have risen to significant frequencies about 7,500 years ago in the central Balkans and Central Europe, a place and time roughly corresponding to the archaeological Linearbandkeramik and Starčevo cultures. From there, it most probably spread eastwards as far as India. Likewise, one of the four alleles associated with lactase persistence in African population is also probably of European origin.[23] Since North Africans also possess this version of the allele, it probably originated earlier, in the Near East, but the earliest farmers did not have high levels of lactase persistence and, subsequently, did not consume significant amounts of unprocessed milk.[24] Lactase persistence in sub-Saharan Africa almost certainly had a separate origin, probably more than one,[25] and it is also likely that there was a separate origin associated with the domestication of the Arabian camel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactase_persistence#Evolutionary_advantages

>>373398
So, while I don't know any sudanese people, is it safe to assume that they fart all the time?

>>373398
So not only are they invading, but they're launching gas attacks too?

Europe is fucked.

>>369318
>what are debtor prisons
>what is Australia.

File: Fort_Sumter.jpg (110KB, 477x288px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 477x288px

>>369259
>Slaves have guaranteed food and shelter.

No wages though.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Letter_from_a_Freedman_to_His_Old_Master

>>373442
>YFW Major Anderson, the officer in command of Ft. sumter that night was pro-slavery.

>>373442
They didn't have wages after the war either, under the sharecropping system.

>>372334
>i posted a man wearing an outdated hat, so your argument is invalid

ebic win!

>>369245
Regarding 18th and 19th century slavery:
In the USA, no. In Brazil, yes. Average lifespan of an African slave brought to Brazil: 2 years.

File: 1413652001346_wps_35_Turkish_Kurds_watch_smoke.jpg (181KB, 962x644px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 962x644px

>>372406
yeah this works in pretty much every totalitarian iron fist state.
not getting killed at the end of the day is the best motivation you can get if you lived in cambodia a few decades ago or live in best korea today

>>373742
>Average lifespan of an African slave brought to Brazil: 2 years.
Holy shit Portugal what the fuck

File: 1435399944154.png (186KB, 298x423px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 298x423px

>>369245
Does it fucking matter? Any way you cut it, treating humans as though they're property is wrong.
>all these fucking /pol/tards going full dindo ITT

Well slavemasters gave their children a cocksucking nanny for the children not to grow up as black women loving white men. This was a social strategy used to control demographics. How would you like to be sucking your slavemasters childrens dick any time they desired?

>>373937
I think it was about 8 months in the British sugar colonies btw.

>>373442
cool letter.

>over 600,000 Americans died to end slavery

>

>>374335
Highly relevant to the topic at hand.

>>369245
You're right. Think of slaves as livestock: a farm requires a healthy, functioning cow

The problem is that you're keeping a human in that livestock mindset
Thus, mistreatment is magnified and seen as morally reprehensible.
That's not to say it didn't happen. It's a combination of power-tripping and thinking beating your slave will increase productivity/discipline

>>369274
/thread

File: 12274565_10153781746128894_2084422156508007696_n.jpg (21KB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 500x280px

Mein gott. /pol/ has taken over /his/.

>>374408
This is not an apt comparison. Cows are not beasts of burden. Bulls are. You don't treat a milk making cow the same way you treat a bull pulling pulling a plow.

File: 8d5ebf.jpg (175KB, 970x1369px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 970x1369px

>>369253
Ancient Roman slavery was not the same kind of slavery practised by Americans, it was very easy for a slave in Rome to become a freedman, not so much if you were a subhuman black dude in America

>>369254
You ever heard of institutionalisation

Of course using Django Unchained is the worst reference point possible, or really any hollywood movie.

>>369245
Depends a lot on the time period really.

In ancient Rome it was common for slaves to be able to earn their freedom if they worked hard for their masters, this actually caused a bit of a crisis as the slave population steadily declined throughout the Imperial period.

But in any case the Roman slaves were treated decently, typically most house slaves would have been treated adequately, you don't want your door greeter to have a black eye and a broken nose would you? That would be barbaric

If they're doing menial labour like picking cotton you can probably bruise them as much as you want as long as you don't put them out of work. IN general it was probably a combination of the fear of the violence their masters could put upon them or that they were uneducated and believed this was all they were good for, institutionalisation and all that.

Threads like these is why /lit/ hates us

>saying that slavery was horrific makes you a bleeding heart liberal

ok mr stormweenie

>>369245
Yes. Slavery is one of the most studied and well-understood historical phenomena, especially in the Americas. Just hit the local library and start reading.

>>374521
I would limit your description of roman slavery to the (early?) imperial and late republican period. During the years of roman expansion the massive influx of POW slaves led to extremely harsh treatment of them, which in turn led to the servile wars.

File: 1413895779448.jpg (14KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 225x225px

>>369318
large number volunteer for wage slavery in the present

>>375951
>years of roman expansion
Fair enough, it's pretty silly of me to have made blanket statements, the Romans changed many times over the course of the 1000 years or so that they existed.

>>373442
noice

Django was on last TV yesterday

Most anti white thing I've ever seen ,12 years at least had truth to it

>>376271
how is django """antiwhite"""?

>>369245
Considering Caribbean slaves could not reproduce fast enough to maintain a working population, I would suggest that yes, they did not have a pleasant life.

>>376331

This was actually all slaves until the British decided to outlaw slaving in their territories, thus making it uneconomic to run them into the ground, as had been standard protocols of the learned elders of Dixie beforehand.

>>376347
Not in the US South though. Brazil, La Plata, and Jamaica were particularly brutal.

>>376371
That is, the US form of slavery was actually temperate vs that of 18th-19th century british colonies. Not all chattal slavery is equal.

>>376301
Apparently white people being antagonists in any movie regardless of context qualifies as anti white nowadays.

>>376371
>>376378

No, it was. The 'temperance' was introduced as a result of being unable to import more slaves. Its logical considering the conditions of the time.
Its pretty typical that Americans would try to make even their slavery more 'humane'. Nonsensical.

>>376392
It isnt about "Americans"

The climate of the US South and the nature of the work (Tobacco pre cotton gin vs harvesting of sugar cane) led to a way lower mortality rate. US slave pops had stable populations in the 18th century. The nature of the slavery was more temperate just because working slaves sunup to sundown in North Carolina is different than doing the same in Barbados.

>>374492
>it was very easy for a slave in Rome to become a freedman
Unless you were a war prisoner sent to the mines.

>>376543

Urban slaves had it easy, in the rural world, other was the truth.

>>376558

Well, easy... Easier.

>>376301
>>376385
come off it both of you

the movie from beginning to end was a big advertisement on just how evil whitey was to the blacks and how goddamn terrible we should all feel for them

>>376585

Fucking policemen

>>376585
So apocalypto was about how big evil mayans should be held responsible for human sacrifices?

Black Hawk Down was about evil niggers?

Fuck off.

>>369428
i understand your point, but the thing is you want to look at history and stop judging. just look, ask yourself how and why.

>>376627
No don't you see? Anything that portrays any white people in a remotely negative manner is evil anti-white propganda!

Just like how the new Mad Max was feminist propaganda because it had a strong female lead!

>>369274
Then how come so many freedmen from ancient Rome greatly respected their masters.

>>369331
>slavery is ok
>get redpilled
please suicide yourself to death you mouthbreathing retard

>>376585
>implying slavery wasn't actually bad

>>369245
YEA IT WASNT AS HORRIBLE ITS NOT LIKE YOU WERE A FUCKING SLAVE OR ANYTHING

THIS WEBSITE JESUS CHRIST

>>369318
Quite a lot do it today. I believe the term is "Student Loan"

>>369245
slaves had it good

>>369245
There are multiple cases of slaveowners being charged with crimes for excessive beating and murdering slaves.

>>376301
Django is not "anti-white", it's a fucking fiction by Tarantino meant to be as violent as possible.

>>376718
How free are you?

>>376837
>>376301
>slave gets revenge by murdering a bunch of racist whites

gee i wonder

>>376882
The main villain was the black guy though. And one of the main protags was white

>>376882

You aint very smart, aint you?

>>376882
surely that makes it an anti-slavery movie

>>376882
I actually don't see anything wrong with a mistreated slave killing his owners. If a white slave did it to his black masters, I'd feel the same way.

Yes, slavery is inherently awful. You aren't in control of your own life and the institution of slavery inherently involves expressly dehumanizing practices like punishing hope and familial bonds.

>>376932
We're pretty much all slaves still, only now we are expected to buy our own food and clothes.

>>376932
That said, some slavery was worse than others. Sugar plantations were so awful that Haiti required a constant flow of new slaves to replace all the ones that died. Also race based chattel slavery really fucked up American society for the longest time and we still feel the effects despite slavery ending like 150 years ago.

>>369301
A lot of russian prison colonies are pretty easy to leave. The problem is that you end up in the middle of tundra far far away from civilization.

>>376939
You aren't completely wrong, but a 9-5 job isn't comparable to actual slavery. Business don't actively try to make you feel less than human by breaking up all your social relationships and wiping you for expressing thoughts and ideas beyond picking cotton. Those practices weren't just due to asshole slave owners. They were a requirement to keep institution of slavery alive.

>>376950
*whipping

>>369334
In late russian empire the landowners didn't actually interact much with serfs as long as they payed the obrok or the barshina. They certainly didn't micromanage them the way plantation owners did.

>>374335
>implying the 300,000 Confederates who died did it to end slavery

Sometimes, maybe, but they were still slaves. Other times it really was horrible. Either way though; They couldnt quit their job and move over to the nicer plantation owner. Their owner was free to punish them as he liked. Most times they couldnt do anything, couldnt go outside at night, werent allowed to learn to read etc.
It doesnt really matter how conditions were, being a slave is shit enough.

>>376939
No, you still have civil rights. You can take your boss to court if he treats you like shit. You can quit your job. Slaves couldn't.

>>369291
His book is also a bunch of stories amalgamated from various slaves. So it's not a very reliable source

>>369255
>>369254
>>369261
>>369268
>>369266
>>369274
>>369291
>>369301
>>369303
>>369321
>>369331
>>369334
>>369342
>>369355
>>369372
>>369388
>>369394
>>369397
>>369411
>>369418
>>369427
>>369440
>>369475
>>369497
>>369513
>>369862
>>370354
>>370391
>>370431
>>372334
>>372339
>>372382
>>372409
>>372426
>>372479
>>372418
>>372525
>>374408
Anyone I replied to is too retarded to post on /his/ and should leave this board and never return. In fact, I have a great alternative board for you:
>>>/pol/

File: 1380697092809.jpg (42KB, 479x720px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 479x720px

>>377572

>sure you were sold and distributed against your will the same as cattle, but slavery wasn't that bad! you weren't starved and tortured on a daily basis (most of the time)
>libkek propaganda makes it seem so bad!

when memeing goes wrong

>beaten
Hardly. Slaves cost A LOT of money.
>malnourished
There were laws that stated that owners had to feed their slaves
>neglected,
Owners also had to provide shelter.
>depressed
Some didn't know any better

Yeah, OP, you are right. Why would you beat, malnourish, and not provide shelter to something you expect work out of? Makes no sense. But liberals have no sense to speak of.