I doubt real antebellum slavery was this bad.

Most of the things I have read about southerners from this period suggests they were a very pious, gentle people who cared for the welfare of their subjects. Not saying owning another human being is right. But, come on now...

>>212510999 (OP)
That one song was really good though!

niggers are better off enslaved lest they pull a haiti

>>212510999 (OP)
>Most of the things I have read about southerners from this period suggests they were a very pious, gentle people who cared for the welfare of their subjects

>>212510999 (OP)
Didn't he get cucked in this movie?

>>212510999 (OP)
That form of slavery was quite shit compared to some other historical forms of slavery, notably the Roman empire had quite a bit of rights and protections for slaves during certain periods.

>>212511734
He was probably the equivalent of the lazy, uppity negros you see working at McDonald's or popeyes nowadays. He didn't get beat for nothing. Slaves were very expensive to own and house.

>>212510999 (OP)
>Most of the things I have read about southerners from this period suggests they were a very pious, gentle people who cared for the welfare of their subjects.
Treatment of slaves varied HEAVILY from person to person. Just because most people in the south cared about their slaves doesn't mean they all did.
The treatment depicted in this movie probably wasn't super common, but definitely happened on some plantations.

>>212510999 (OP)
I watched this movie in the theater with my black girlfriend at the time and she cried on my shoulder throughout the whole thing.

>>212511771

I read that territories under the Napoleonic legal code were more enlightened, e.g., not breaking up negro families at slave auctions.

>>212511841
Slaves were essentially expensive assets in a slaveowner's portfolio.
What would incentivise them to damage them and make them worthless? Do you realise just how expensive they were?

Would you buy a Lamborghini and smash all the windows because it ran out of fuel?

On top of this, they were actually considered as people whom you shared compassion for, despite what is claimed.

>>212511959
>people never do anything that is irrational/not cost effective
There are millionaires who buy supercars and abandon them in deserts when they run out of gas.
You're just baiting at this point.

>>212512098
>comparing a rural plantation owner to an oil rich saudi prince with no concept of reality.

You see like the one who is baiting.

>>212511771
Are you joking? Roman slavery was the worst of all probably. They regularly worked them to death, barely troubled themselves to feed them, clothed them in little more than scraps of cloth and often raped them or prostituted them. A roman slave would have seen the negro's life in antebellum south as one of Luxury.

>>212511734
They caught him fucking a horse. Got what he deserved

>>212512222
You and me, we're done professionally.

>>212512098
no there aren't. are you 8 years old?

>>212512330
Source?

>>212512334
I don't work with coloreds.

>>212511734
Didn't he kill his wife?

>>212510999 (OP)
You're right slavery wasn't as bad as movies depict it.

Surveys with former slaves reveal that majority of them had positive views of their master. And a lot of them stayed on their plantation years after Civil War ended. If they were these heellish death camp places as Tarantino depicts them this wouldn't have happened.

>>212512375
No, I just heard about that happening in Dubai once and never really tried to verify how true it was. Looking it up now the real explanation is a lot more boring.

>>212511734
Whippings were relatively common (though not as brutal as this one) but you should keep in mind this was common practice at the time not exclusive to slaves.

Historian went over diaries of white children living in 18th century and 80% mentioned being struck with an object by their parents. Abraham Lincoln had scars on his back because his father beat him bloody. This was a brutal time. If people beat their own kids they will of course extend it to their slaves.

>>212512330
>>212512409
>Slandering a slave
That's low, even for you fucks

>>212511858
>with my black girlfriend
Gross dude.

>>212512330
but horses are kind of made for bbc?

>>212510999 (OP)
Chuds really be like
>Slavery really wasnt all that bad
Okay then, you give up everything you have in life and go pick cotton for 12 hours a day everyday until you die

>>212512712
>give up everything you have in life

They didn't have anything. They were captured by rival African tribes and then sold to shipping merchants.

>pick cotton for 12 hours a day everyday until you die

20 years was the most common in the south

>>212512712
>Okay then, you give up everything you have in life and go pick cotton for 12 hours a day everyday until you die

You probably already work a job that's more stressful than picking cotton. Do you own a home? Do you have a family even? Do you think your vote matters?

>>212512318
Depends on the kind of slave. There were state owned slaves and privately owned slaves. Then there were domestic and field slaves. Field public slaves had it the worst, as you described. Private slaves could vary depending on the whims of the owner, they could be abused to hell and back (although this changed over the course of Roman history, it became increasingly unacceptable to mistreat your slaves and near the end of the empire it could carry some heavy penalties) or they could be a family friend that you owned. Tutors in particular were highly priced and valued by their owners. Some owners even went to far as to pay for their slaves' burial and left affectionate messages behind. They could also free them and it was seen as a prestigious practice because it reflected both piety and affluence. Freed slaves were still indebted to their original owners and if they were disrespectful to them they could incur legal penalties.
It was a very complex system.

>>212510999 (OP)
>I doubt real antebellum slavery was this bad.
No, it was worse. African slaves weren't considered humans, so the slaveowners had absolutely no regard for the slaves' lives or welfare. The slaveowners could literally do what they wanted to the them. Those who could afford them had hundreds of slaves. It was a horrific time.

>>212510999 (OP)
>>212511771
>>212512318
It's an actor's interpretation of a director's instructions based of his personal interpretation of the memoirs of an exceptionally unlucky circumstance in an already harsh institution. If you want to know what the real life of a typical slave was like, read and judge for yourself.
For many abolitionists, the problem wasn't even with the treatment of slaves per se, but the fact that such stories could exist in a land supposing itself to be founded upon, and dedicated to, freedom and justice for all.
www gutenberg org/cache/epub/23/pg23-images.html#link2H_4_0003

>>212512778
Yes, I'm paying mortgage, I have family, friends, free time and hobbies
If you're existence is as bad as the one of a slave, that's on you, unlike with the slaves that had no choice and were dragged with chains to work until they collapsed

AAAHHH, THIS IS SO HARD! WE MUST IMPORT MILLIONS OF AFRICANS TO PERFORM THIS TASK!

>>212513014
It was only the rich who had plantations that did that, just like how it's the rich getting ready to import a gorillion Jeets to do cheap coding today

>>212513014
Did anyone else assume Eli Whitney was black as a kid?

>>212512920
Slaves worked fewer hours a year than white farmers.

>>212512855
Was that before or after Native Americans did it to each other? Before or after Europeans did that to each other? Africans? South Americans? Roos? Kiwis? Every single nation has participated in slavery even in Antiquity.

>>212513014
the people who actually shipped and owned and mistreated the slaves were actually trying to destroy the nation from within because they're jewish. slavery was already obsolete at the time.

>>212510999 (OP)
Because theyre lying dumbass, yes some slaves were treated "nice", but that really depends on your definition of nice.

>>212512098
Those are stupid children as opposed to men running a business in a tougher time

>>212512855
>the nonsensical hollywood view of history
Horses aren't viewed as humans either but horse owners didn't just wantonly damage their own property

>>212512920
What a fag.

>>212513228
Source?

>>212510999 (OP)

What’s the bad part?


Notice they only get punished if they do something wrong, and even then it isn’t every time.

>>212511734
>watch the will smith movie about this guy
>scene where he joins the Union Army
>his white commanding officer sees this photo of all the whip marks on his back
>"He obviously doesnt take order well!"

>>212510999 (OP)
Hmm almost like Hollywood is Jewish propaganda.

>>212510999 (OP)
>their subjects
They didn't consider them subjects. They considered them animals. Much like domesticated animals, they considered them property. They cared about them in the sense that they cared about their property. Considering them animals opened the door into them doing more heinous shit to them than they were doing to other white people.

>>212512520
Children were actually more likely to get whipped than slaves.

>>212513014
>plants magically grown clothing materials for us
And people still doubt God exists

>>212511734
If we replaced long expensive jail sentences with lashes to the back, half of niggers today would have this

>>212512758
>They didn't have anything.
>Chud can't fathom an existence with little material wealth could be blissful.
Not surprising, really. Since chuds generally don't have friends, they don't know the feeling of harmony and belonging present within tight-knit social communities such as hunter-gatherers.

>They were captured by rival African tribes and then sold to shipping merchants.
Which makes slavery okay, for some reason?
>What do you mean, buying child porn is immoral? I'm not the one who produced it!

>20 years was the most common in the south
Yeah, because slaves usually didn't see their fifties.

>>212514466

>>212510999 (OP)
Loved the way fassbender said nigger in this movie maybe the best performance of the nigger word in cinema history. when he's falling over the fences? remember? now that's a nigger

>>212514360
>what is domestication?

>>212514333
The idea that slaves were mistreated is immediately debunked by the fact blacks remained in the south after slavery among their supposed tormenters and lived peacefully. There was no abuse, once forcibly freed by northern tyranny the kind southerners let them be the negros, far from being scared, felt quite welcome

>>212514490
I accept your concession.

>>212512920
>and were dragged with chains to work until they collapsed

They literally sent them to town on their own to buy shit.

>t.https://youtu.be/3lfczBPS4c8

>>212511841
>Conditions and behaviors vary wildly from person to person
Duh. Great insight. And? Some people beat their kids. Should we assume every parent beats their kids?

>>212510999 (OP)
You're right. Christians were generally motivated to treat their foreign slaves better than other nations

There was for example no practice of castrating male slaves like was normal in islamic or eastern civilizations.
And the biggest proof of all is that the millions of african slaves taken to the americas still exist today, while the millions of african slaves taken to iraq and elsewhere in the middle east and turkey do not exist anymore because they were worked to death either as labourers or soldiers and usually not allowed to continue breeding with each other. There's a tiny community of a few thousand zanj slaves in iraq today when millions were brought there to work in agriculture in basra. the captured african slaves were almost wiped out and worked to death without even being allowed to fall in love and start families with each other, basically exterminated.

Thanks to anti-christian , third worldist propaganda the historical truth is inverted and liberal professors usually tell the opposite story, that because some slaves to the rulers were given quite powerful positions that therefore muslims treated their slaves better on average. But this is shameless cherry picking like looking up individual journals of new-world slave owners who took a house negro slave as a secretary and gave them responsibilities and benefits. They claim that all non-western slavery was nice, humanistic slavery but western slavery alone was "chattel slavery" . complete nonsense.

>>212514618
>Should we assume every parent beats their kids?
That's the exact opposite of the point I'm making.

>>212514626
>Thanks to anti-christian , third worldist propaganda
You can just say Jewish.

>>212514534
Slavery is abuse by definition.

Doesn't matter how "nice" you're treating your property. The fact that you took away another human being's freedom is in itself abuse, and thus all acts following that initial injury are abusive too until the initial injury is undone (i. e. the person is freed and paid damages for their time in captivity).

>b-but they would be starving in Africa if it weren't for me
Maybe, maybe not. In any case, it's not up to you to make decisions for someone else.

>>212514626
>my crime is less abhorrent than your crime

>>212514702
>Maybe, maybe not.

No maybe dude. They would have been slaves in Africa. Whitey didn't roll up and start abducting people from villages. The slave ships just pulled up to the 1000 year old slave market at Zanzibar and bought people who'd already been abducted and enslaved by the Africans and Arabs.

Slavery in Africa was even worse than in the Americas. For starters they tended to castrate all the men into eunuchs because it was so easy for them to just abduct new people.

>>212514534
>The idea that slaves were mistreated is immediately debunked by the fact blacks remained in the south after slavery among their supposed tormenters and lived peacefully.
I sometimes wonder how some of you can breathe and think at the same time.
1. Relocating requires means and opportunity.
2. Relocating when a majority of your family cannot is a tough sell
3. They didn't live peacefully, and lynching was still a thing within the last century.
4. Sharecropping as a way to make money provided enough to survive, but wasn't far removed from indentured servitude.
5. The migration for those that went north took a long time and they had to face discrimination anyway with local laws excluding them with redlining and Jim Crow bring things that happened less than 100 years ago.
6. Owning people, regardless of how nice you are is still abuse.

>>212514702
Your redefinition of slavery as abuse doesn't map onto reality and does nothing in the way of making a point or explanation because it just seems immediately silly to do that to a word

>>212514745
>muh lynching
>muh jim crow
>muh its hard to travel

>>212514466
>Which makes slavery okay, for some reason?
No one is saying that. But it was a long time ago and only a fraction of the existing population in America owned slaves or profited from the industry. So I don't care. Slavery is bad, mmmkay? It's not coming back and those who participated and profited off it are long dead, including the slaves themselves. It's history. But it's also not a problem and a non-issue in contemporary American discourse. Also, African-Americans have gotten such a wild amount of reparations generationally in the form of welfare, preferred selection to institutions and job placement, and general aid it's almost embarrassing how their own culture has degraded to worse than slavery. They live in self-created ghetto plantations instead, and they've sure done a bang-up job of it.

>>212514741
So, by that reasoning, it's okay to visit child prostitutes, because if you didn't rape them, they'd just be raped by someone else?

you can't blame the people buying slaves when it was legal and call it abuse, if there's any wrong doing it's the people catching and selling the slaves

you guys let the real problem people off the hook while blaming innocent farmers that just needed their crops picked. theyd have hired people to do it if slaves were illegal they just needed the work done and it was legal. basically victim blaming

>>212514776
>only a fraction of the existing population in America owned slaves or profited from the industry
The American institution and economy was literally built on the back of slavery. If slavery hand not existed to make the US an economic powerhouse, the US would be several countries with less than a third of the stability, population and might it has now. Canada would the calling the countries south of it "canada's socks."

>>212514752
Alright, so if someone steals your car, that's bad. But now that he's stolen it anyway, he's within the law and it's a-ok for him to keep driving it around? Maybe he even decides to return it to you one day, and don't you dare not be grateful for it then? Also it's better for him to be driving it anyway, because he's taking care of it while you couldn't afford to go to a car wash every so often?

>>212514675
No, cultural marxism isn't as important as you think it is. Even 200 years ago you had white libshit intellectuals and philosophers developing the same tendencies you see in modern white libs and progs today.

Susan sontag, noel ignatiev, time wise, every anti-white jew you can think of was jumping on a band wagon of self-hate that was already trendy among decadent white intellectuals 100+ years ago.
Anti-white jews made the problem worse for sure, and their psychology was obviously different from self-hating whites. But the real problem is the infection of liberalism within the white elites which predisposes them to self-hatred and being unable to say no to niggers.

this disease had been infecting the white elites slowly since the 1800s but reached a tipping point after WW2 where the white slef hatred ideology became strong enough among the elites to start taking over elite institutions so that they could begin the white self-hatred cultural revolution . the full domination of anti-white ideology among the elites was achieved with the civil rights movement.

anti-white jews helped this process along but it was already happening among self-hating whites. Our bigger enemy is the enemy within among the elites and the anti-white ideology brought about by liberalism.

for proof of this check out some of the old liberal quotes in this essay
https://ncofnas.com/p/why-we-need-to-talk-about-the-rights
and you can find more in the book "Who Is My Neighbour" by Achord and Dow. It's when liberalism starts rising among the philosophers of the 19th century that intellectuals start opposing the natural preference for their own kin and people.
This is the primary enemy.

>>212514776
>It's not coming back
It never went away, it just isn't out in the open anymore. The average county in a metropolitan area probably has more slaves working in 'massage' parlors than the average plantation in the south had working for them.

>>212514724
Yes, that's right. Shouldn't you be focusing on and be more outraged by the more abhorrent crime if you're such a colourblind , unbiased, rational, broad-minded, universalist humanist?

And yet all of your education has been informing you that European slavery was the greatest evil, if not uniquely evil despite Europeans actually treating their slaves better than other civilizations and ending slavery worldwide.

Everything you've been taught and which as been focused on is motivated by anti-white resentment from hostile non-whites or self-hating whites.

>>212514889
All this is explained by r/K selection theory. It's scary how simple the answer is really.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Evolutionary-Psychology-Behind-Politics-Conservatism/dp/0982947941


Basically, once a society achieves a certain level of stability and wealth, the conditions are ripe for the r-strategy (which involves instinctive treachery to your own group) to take over.

People are right to dislike the jews, but the jews only have the power they do because they act as a catalyst for the large number of anti-white white people.

>>212514776
>those who participated and profited off it are long dead, including the slaves themselves
Wealth passes from generation to generation, anon. As does poverty, for that matter. Historical events have effects for hundreds of years. This is the reason why man likes to study history in the first place. Why are we where we're at right now? Who made the world the way it is today?
You can't deny today's social stratification just because its initiators are long dead.

>>212514829
>slave owners were the REAL victims
LMAO
The absolute state of chuds

A plantation was a business. No business owner wants their employees riled up or rebellious. Slaves were taken care of adequately in 99% of cases. And there was no major rebellion for centuries, so slaves weren't quite as upset with the status quo as some allege. They probably had a higher quality of life than back in Africa as tribal folk under duress from slaver kingdoms.

The funnier thing is that this arrangement fucked up the economy for poor southern whites and they still went to war to fight and die for it.

It's important to note, when judging what slavery was like in the US, is that people at the time considered blacks to be savages. It was a common sentiment, especially among more progressive minds, that they were helping the slaves by bringing them to a place with food, shelter, and work, as opposed to the horrid conditions of their homeland, which were portrayed as savage and barbaric. Yes, there was obviously a ton of abuse, rape, murder at the hands of some of the slave owners, this sentiment doesn't change that when we view that era from today. For them, though, blacks were this complicated issue of "how do we help these savages and benefit from their existence?" It's why the term "house bigger" exists in the first place - nicer, smarter blacks got to live in the house, got nicer clothes and food, and occasionally had their own rooms. Sure, still slaves, but beloved parts of the family nonetheless.
Slavery in the US was complicated, that's why there was a war about it. To try to simplify it misses the infinite amount of nuance that goes on socially, politically, and morally.

>>212515055
>https://www.amazon.co.uk/Evolutionary-Psychology-Behind-Politics-Conservatism/dp/0982947941

This book doesn't sound very convincing from the blurb because it describes free markets as right wing, when in reality free market ideology has been one of the primary drivers of liberal utopian, individualist ideology. You can see this from quotes of 19th century economists fantasising about how free trade will destroy borders and nations and bring about utopia. free market ideology encourages individualism and therefore colourblindness and looks down on favouring your own kin and people.
libertarianism and free market ideology is a strain within liberalism which is an overall leftwing movement , but it's merely a bit to the right of most other strains within liberalism.

Maybe there's something there but I don' have confidence at the moment.

>>212510999 (OP)
>I doubt real antebellum slavery was this bad
The treatment depicted might not have been the most common, but it was practically a slap on the wrist compared to the horrific conditions endured by a sizeable minority. The shit some of the richest plantation families in the deep south did were outright satanic.

>southerners from this period suggests they were a very pious, gentle people who cared for the welfare of their subject
There's an issue with those definitions. They were gentle, in that they they didn't 'unnecessarily' torture or wound their slaves, but whipping and pain compliance weren't just commonplace, but the standard. They did care for the welfare of their slaves, but believed they were instructing this subhuman race in how to become Men, and so they'd 'correct' their behaviour with pain, as they would for their children, but on a greater scale; being whipped, chained together, forced to work until collapse, held in hotboxes, deprived of food and water etc. were all very common 'corrective' measures. Even their piety was an issue, because they felt compelled to educate their slaves in religion using the same methods as they 'educated' them in the fields, but denied them the ability to actually read the word of God. They also used the bible as evidence that slavery was moral in the eyes of God, and so held slaves in torment with the blessing of both the laws of Man and God.

I thought most depictions of slavery were extremely exaggerated, right up until I saw the shit that rich, old southern families STILL keep in basements and safe deposit boxes to this day, and will gleefully share with you if you seem sympathetic. I agreed with a guy that many soldiers fighting for the confederacy did so out of real fear of a servile revolt, rather than to preserve slavery, and within an hour he excitedly showed me the iron bits his family would jam and bolt into the mouths of slaves to stop them talking when they weren't in front of overseers.

>>212514979
>how dare you care more about your own culture's history and past mistakes than the history and past mistakes of other groups?
>Why are you against getting fucked in the ass with a lubed strap-on? Other people get assfucked with a dry cactus! Where's your outcry in there? Why do you care more about not getting fucked in the ass yourself than other people getting fucked?

>>212515153

I'm sure the suffering of black people under slavery in the USA has been not just exaggerated, but wildly exaggerated. A lot of people make a very good living from exaggerating it.

All you have to do is look at the sort of people they are and look at the way they behave.

I followed the 2016 USA election very closely and anti-white liberals lied about events there every day even as they were happening. If people lie about the present which everyone can see with their own eyes, how much more are they going to lie about the past, which can't defend itself?


I'm sure there were plenty of cases of cruelty towards slaves in the antebellum South. But I also think that probably on the whole slaves were not treated all that badly. Shelby Foote said something of the kind in an interview. He said, white people in Mississippi (where he grew up) thought of blacks as being basically like children or animals. They were inferior, but that meant you had to look after them. He emphasized, “Look, I know this sounds shocking today, but that's how it was, and usually, it didn't mean cruelty, it meant reasonable kindness.”

I'll trust the Shelby Footes of this world over the Ta-Nehisi Coateses every day of the week.

>>212515355
Fuck off kike.

>>212515355
I'm not the other guy but you just said something very revealing. You just said, basically that you "care more about your own culture's past mistakes than the mistakes of other groups".

"Caring about them" is one thing. But using them to hurt your own group every chance you get is another. Especially when your own group is in constant conflict with other groups WHICH ARE NOT MORALLY ANY BETTER THAN YOUR OWN GROUP AND IN MOST CASES A LOT WORSE.

This sort of racial masochism is only ever asked of whites. Do people ask black people to obsess over the failing of blacks? Do people ask Mongolians to don sackcloth and ashes because Genghis Khan killed 10% of the world population at the time or whatever it was? They have a massive great statue up for him in their capital city, don't they?

If every group except whites looks out for their own interests, and whites go out of their way to sabotage theirs, guess who is going to go extinct?

The price of "anti-racism" is non-existence.

>>212515483
I accept your concession.

>>212514771
nta but you're being retarded
the word travel is actually from the root french word travail which meant to toil hard at something, traveling and resettling somewhere is difficult enough today without a proper support network but back in the day it was near impossible for the average plebian to up and go somewhere and resettle. The word 'travel' was a reference to this difficulty but eventually it came to mean the journey itself instead of the work that went into it.

tl;dr you couldn't up and settle in a city 500 miles away today and you think some negroes could've done it when they didn't have cars and probably didn't own shit like a horse

>>212510999 (OP)
They were only cruel in the way they transported the slaves from Africa. Although to be fair slave traders were Jewish and also it’s just the reality of the time period, there really wasn’t any better way to ship over dozens to hundreds of slaves. But once they were out of the hands of kikes the slaves were treated better than they were in africa. Better food, better housing, better clothing and unironically more freedom. In Africa there were constantly fighting for survival they never had any downtime. In America all of their basic needs were taken care of. When sundown came they had all the time in the world to shuck and jive. And guess what? Most white Americans were working to sundown too so it’s not like they had it any better. And if you were a house nigger you were living a better life than 90% of whites.

>>212515534
>every chance you get is another
Maybe in Burgerland this might be different, but here in Europe we're pretty sane individuals, and as such, we only talk about slavery when it's brought up (yes, Europe too, had slaves, although we grew out of it much earlier than out developementally stunted brothers across the pond).
The ability to critically reflect upon your own culture's history and past wrongdoings is an important step towards self-improvement for individuals and the nation as a whole. Every retard sandnigger or rice drone can wave a flag around and be "proud" of muh heritage. You're no better than Third Worlders if you can't accept the bad aspects of your culture as well.
But then, burgers are practically mixed mystery meat anyway by now, so your mouth-drooling, flag-waving behavior does fit ...

>>212515068
This has been tested and what you're insinuating is false.

in general families only stay rich for multiple generations because they have better genes for being successful and the equivalent goes for people who have been poor for multiple generations.

An economist tracked social status of 400000 people in England for hundreds of years using church records that recorded marriage, ancestry plus occupation and found that an additive genetic model fit the data for how socioeconomic status is passed on far better than an environmental-cultural models.
For example an "wealth gets passed on" environmental model would reason that because wealth during childhood is so important for the adult outcomes of children, then a middle income family that has only 1 or 2 children where the parents can spend a lot of money on each of child should have children that end up much more successful than a middle income family that has only 6 or 10 or 12 children. But in reality, whether you have one kid that you spend tonnes of money on or 12 kids that you spend 12 times less money on , your kids will end up basically the same levels of success as adults. If you have 12 kids your kids would only end up 7% less successful than if you had 1 kid.
This result what would you would expect to observe if success in adulthood is mainly caused by inherited genetic characteristics of mental ability and temperament but is the opposite of what you would expect to observe if success in adulthood is mainly caused by how wealthy your upbringing is and how much money is spent on you.

https://milkyeggs.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/ClarkGlasgow2021.pdf
see pages 24 and 25 for the result I talked about.

>>212515068
>>212515714

So basically, blacks aren't poor today because they were slaves 100 years ago, they're poor today because they're low IQ due to their genes.
proof : since 1979, a poor black boy has been as likely to raise their socioeconomic status as a poor white boy so long as their IQ scores were the same
https://www.pew.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/pcs_assets/2012/empreportsupward20intergen20mobility2008530pdf.pd
see figure 13

blacks have lower IQ due to their genes
https://scholarlypublishingcollective.org/uip/ajp/article-abstract/134/4/480/291766/Between-Group-Mean-Differences-in-Intelligence-in?redirectedFrom=fulltext

Why didn’t Southerners just ship the blacks back to Africa?

>>212515252

Saying the book is calling free markets right-wing is not at all a good advertisement for it because that's not really what it's about at all. He's just applying a well-accepted theory in evolutionary biology to human affairs and it makes perfect sense.

The book is not very well-written, which is a pity because the argument deserves wider consideration. It really does explain a whole host of phenomena.

Doesn't sound as though you're going to, but if you get a chance, I would strongly recommend at least just glancing through it.

>>212515736
>>212515714
Your data and study is inherently flawed, such a study is essentially impossible to do correctly because you cannot properly track nepotism and if I'm not mistaken the entire study basically pretends nepotism doesn't exist.

>>212515736
>blacks have lower IQ due to their genes
Given that we selectively bred them for like 200 years isn't that partially our fault?

>>212514490
>>212514308
>>212514675
>>212514889
>>212515055
>jews genocides a trillion goys with negative depictions of slavery in film
>gets away with it 100%, never suffers any consequences
>lives to a tender old age before passing peacefully in bed surrounded by wealth and power like Kissinger and co.
>meanwhile, thousands of Palestinians die screaming daily
Where is Allah?

>>212515675
>muh mean jooz enslaving interior races
Vae victis Tyrone

>>212510999 (OP)
>OP finds out movies pick up a setting's most dramatic aspects
Did you also think WW2 was one giant 5-year-long Omaha Beach gorefest?

>>212515355
>>how dare you care more about your own culture's history and past mistakes than the history and past mistakes of other groups?

Why do you care about "your own group" or "your own culture" more than "other groups"?
That sounds pretty parochial and narrow minded. Caring about your own nation or ethnicity more than other nations or ethnicities? isn't that basically racist?

shouldn't you be more colourblind, broadminded and universalist and humanist and care about all humans equally , and thus care more about the more abhorrent crime regardless of whether that crime belongs to your ancestors or someone else's ancestors?

Or is caring about your own ethnicity more than other ethnicities only a bad thing when it means that you love your own ethnicity more than other ethnicities, but when it means that you hate your ethnicity more than other ethnicities , then it's ok or a good thing.

Look at that, liberal ideology boils down to anti-white self hatred again

>>212515714
>>212515736
The argument "blacks today are the underclass because of the lingering effects of slavery" is so ridiculous that I doubt anyone really believes it; they just pretend to.

If this argument were true, then over the years, the gap between blacks and whites would gradually narrow over time.

You might argue that your father having been a slave means you can't learn algebra. (I don't believe it, but you might argue that.) But you can't possibly argue that your great-great-grandfather having been a slave is exactly as bad as your father having been one. If you're claiming that, sorry, you're clearly not arguing in good faith.

So the gap should narrow. But it doesn't, because it's not caused by any historical suppression or trauma or any of that nonsense. It's genetic.

Just look at all the who have come to the USA over the years. Jewish refugees from WWII for example.

These people had suffered far more recently than black people, and had far more disadvantages (for example, not knowing the language) but within a generation they were on their feet.

So why could they do it, and not black people?

Because it's not MUH LINGERING EFFECTS OF EVIL WHITE RACISM.

It's genetic.

>>212515679
First of all, I'm English.

Secondly, it's fine to look at things you think your people are doing wrong and try to correct them. What isn't fine is to use this to sabotage your own group it its competition with other groups, when the other groups are at least as guilty (in fact, often far more guilty) of the same things.

To express it in a simple analogy:

You might say, "rape is wrong, and I will try and persuade my countrymen of this".

That's fine.

But suppose you say "rape is wrong, and some of my countrymen have raped people, therefore I will give my country to this other group of people, even though lots of them have raped people too".

That's not reasonable. In fact it's despicable. But it's what liberals have been doing for the past . . . too many years to think about.

>>212515836
We can't conclude that because it's very possible that conditions like slavery would select for IQ, whereby it would be the most intelligent slaves who would be the best able to problem solve and work out what behaviour is best in order to thrive in those conditions. e.g. the most likely to get easy jobs , the best able to gain the master's favour and avoid punishment.

Furthermore there's still evidence of blacks outside of the americas being lower IQ due to their genes, such as the children african immigrants showing much greater regression to the mean than the children of indian immigrants.
https://www.cremieux.xyz/p/the-myth-of-nigerian-excellence
pic related shows that the indian immigrants high IQ was mainly due to their genes so their kids inherited most of that while the nigerian immigrants high IQ was successful mainly due to luck so their kids were much lower IQ than them.

>>212513206
this is just pathetic coping. why are you even dying on this hill?

>>212515831
cope. science is about having more belief in the model that better explains the data.

the model that childhood wealth is very important to adult success does not explain the data that whether you have one or two children and spend all your money on them or twelve children and spend far less money on them your children as adults will be basically as successful.

Similarly the model that adult success is mainly determined by childhood doesn't explain why the level of correlations in success between adult relatives follows a simple genetic model like the kind you see in behavioural genetics mono/dizygotic twin studies , which the genetic model of socioeconomic status explains perfectly
see figure 1 vs figure 5
https://milkyeggs.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/ClarkGlasgow2021.pdf

>>212515831

>>212516304
You are the one pathetically coping because you can't refute a single thing he said.
Stop coping, incel.

>>212516439
>>212516417
Show me where the data accounts for you spending an average amount relative to your income on your kids and them getting a job at a company because of their last name

>>212511540
I distinctly remember Paul Dano singing the song at the oscars but that shit was scrubbed faster than that disasterous snow white oscar debacle. Holy hell spike lees face was priceless

>>212516417
>>212516439
>anon sees that certain things are passed on to children from their parents like genes
>refuses to acknowledge that other things like connections can be passed on
>equates the connections and nepotism skewing the data to genetics because hurrr

bro

>>212510999 (OP)
Why would you go around beating the shit out of your workers for no reason? Ranchers don’t go around randomly abusing their livestock, and those are literally bred to be killed and chopped up for meat. You’d constantly have slaves too injured to work, and it would kill overall morale, ensuring less productive work and risk suicides/revolts, etc. I guarantee most plantations took fairly good care of their slaves out of pure pragmatism, they just couldn’t leave.

All the whipping shit and all that is just globohomo propaganda, just like portrayals of Hitler being some Saturday Morning Cartoon supervillain. Just look at how much they’re lying to us about shit happening right now.

>>212514889
Wow a non retarded post

>>212515055
White liberals are k strategists

>>212514490
There will be only seething to this.

>>212510999 (OP)
If you listen to the recordings of former slaves that we managed to preserve on early audio. They talk about how much better it was to be slaves and how they all felt like they were part of one big family working together. There’s a reason you never hear them bring out the audio accounts from former slaves in documentaries or in the prologue of movies/tv shows.

>>212514838
Everyone says this shit, but America didn’t really become a real world power until the industrial age, which is a post-slavery movement. Everything from before 1900 has either been fazed out or destroyed by that exact industrial powerhouse, slaves didn’t do shit in this country compared to wage-slaves.

>>212517022
everyone talking about the african slaves but nobody mentions the asians who were made to build the west, they had entire tunnel systems under some towns because they weren't allowed out after dark

>>212516911
Why was the ownership aspect necessary, then?

>>212517322
Shut the fuck up.

>>212516640
I already told you >>212515714
>see pages 24 and 25 for the result I talked about.

>you spending an average amount relative to your income on your kids
Obviously average income families with 10 or 12 children will be able to spend vastly less on their kids than average income families with 1 or 2 children, yet the families with 10 or 12 children end up having children grow up to be basically just as successful.

>them getting a job at a company because of their last name

Last name is only inherited from the paternal side, so if your model says that this is an important factor then your model would predict that The paternal grandfather would be much more correlated with occupational status than maternal grandfather.
But this is not the result that is observed. Like a genetic model of social success would predict, the maternal grandparent is equally correlated with occupational status than the paternal grandparent.
see page 22 and 23
https://milkyeggs.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/ClarkGlasgow2021.pdf
What is more correlated with the paternal grandfather is wealth because in english culture the eldest son typically inherits the property since it is usually not practical to split it.

and what exactly is the environmental-cultural "wealth is inherited" model explanation for why the socioeconomic status of relatives are correlated according to their degree of shared ancestry?

>>212517322
They never left anyway. After being freed, most just stayed around their plantations and kept working. The rest started following the union army around until they blew up a bridge and left all the freed slaves on the other side.

>>212517322
Apprenticeships used to be legally enforced as well. A legal contract can just make things work better

>>212516694
>refuses to acknowledge that other things like connections can be passed on

I never said other things aren't passed on, but non-genetic models explain the data far less well and so are far less important on average than genes.

For example a genetic model of socioeconomic success would predict that no matter how many children you have , they'll be equally successful as adults on average because whether you have one child or 10+ children they all share your genes to the same degree

Whereas cultural-environmental models of socioeconomic success would predict that if you have one or two kids then you can invest much more time and money into raising them and giving them advantages and so parents who have fewer kids will end up with kids who are more much successful as adults than parents who have tonnes of kids.

But this isn't true for average income families, having 12 kids will only end up with kids 7% less successful on average than having 1 kid.
So the effect of investing more time and money into your kids is very small in comparison to the effect simply of the genetics they inherit.

the research shows this and multiple other tests where the genetic model predicts the data extremely well whereas socio-cultural models predict totally different results from wha is actually observed.

https://milkyeggs.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/ClarkGlasgow2021.pdf

But keep on making excuses not to read the paper and not to update your worldview that data that shows your previous worldview is false.

>>212515985
>shouldnt you shouldnt you shouldnt you

No, I shouldn't do anything what I don't wanna do myself. Same as everyone else.

I mean, I know it obviously bugs you that people take an interest in their own history and thereby make you feel bad, but that's not really their problem now, is it?

I suggest asking yourself the question why your own history makes you feel such discomfort that you don't wanna be reminded of it. In which case the next question would be whether or not your country is really as great and magnificent as you'd like it to be.

>>212514741
more likely they'd have gone into the stew pot in africa because slavery wasn't really economically productive enough in a mostly subsistence farming economy. So instead of being meat they were sold.

>>212512670
buck broken cock?

>>212517367
>semantics over the specific last name being passed on
okay dude I understand this is all some sort of weird pathetic cope for you to feel superior to blacks and low class people and without it you've got nothing but honestly you're basically fucking retarded, you lack even basic critical thinking skills. It's like you're so close to seeing the picture and then you decide at the last moment to hyper focus on some stupid shit. We can equate genes to the connections passed on, to the ideas and religions passed on. You're sitting here pretending only things that can be measured are passed on, your entire study premise hinges on the inability to recognize stupid simple shit like nepotism.

>retarded question in your last line durr how do you account for shit that I only can attribute to genetics????
nepotism you stupid fucking retard holy shit you have to be the most autistic sperg irl

>>212517579
>but non-genetic models explain the data far less well and so are far less important on average than genes.
aka shit you can't measure and shit you can't make a stupid fucking study to fluff yourself up about, you've basically undermined anything else you had to say with this statement. The projection from your last line is palpable, this one flawed study completely defines your worldview and to question it completely shakes your foundations.

You're sitting here saying things like getting a job from your father's friend doesn't matter in the data, won't matter in the data like genetics etc. You're a fucking retard, through and through.

>>212516210
You're mixing up different issues here.

It can't be denied that there's a rather large overlap between "takes an interest in the history of slavery and promotes a culture of remembrance around it" people and open-borders-cloudcuckoolanders. But the latter don't demand open borders BECAUSE of slavery.

If anything, they demand it because of past COLONIALISM, which is an entirely different theater. But even then (and I know terminally online culture war chuds have a different perspective on that), open-borders-cloudcuckoolanders are a tiny minority within the electorate.
Inb4
>but they're far more numerous in politics
Who's electing the politicians, then? People like to moan and cry about muh ebul gubernment elites all the time, but at the end of the day, they're the ones voting these people into power. So maybe stop crying about it?

>>212517022
>a real world power until the industrial age
I wonder if economic prosperity has anything to do with the ability to juggernaut through the industrial age.
>>212517219
You're mostly right. It does get talked about but not to the same degree. Immigrants along with former slaves were how we built the railroads that served a massive part in our material transport and industrialization. Chinese on the central pacific. Irish and the Union Pacific, Native Americans on some of the east and prisoners (black men arrested for existing) in the south as a method of legal slavery. The Chinese and Irish were treated like dogshit, the Chinese more because the Irish at least looked white until they opened their mouths. Their experiences however cruel and unfair does not match being actual slaves, and black men during the time had it AT LEAST as bad.

>>212517367
>Uhh if genetics aren't everything explain why the all the kings sons grow up to be successful?? Why not just the oldest one huh?? riddle me that, scienceman!

>>212517612
>caring about your race more than other races is bad! that's racist
but earlier you admitted to caring more about your race more than other races. if caring about your race more than other races is bad then shouldn't you not do that
>nuh uh it's ok for me because... I wanna do it myself... and there's no such thing as right and wrong anyway, everyone should do what they want....

lmao what transparently shitty, self-contradictory, motivated reasoning.
You got absolutely pinned and exposed and raped and unable to refute anything said in >>212515985

> it obviously bugs you that people take an interest in their own history and thereby make you feel bad
No, what bugs me is when people spread inaccurate beliefs about the history of European peoples relative to the history of other peoples of the world, specifically it bugs me when people spread inaccurate propaganda to insinuate that Europeans or European nations were more evil than other nations or had harmful effect on other peoples of the world.

>question why your own history makes you feel such discomfort
My own history, accurately told and accurately situated in the context of world history, makes me feel great pride. I'm so glad to have such successful, competent ancestors who made the world a better place :)

>whether or not your country is really as great and magnificent as you'd like it to be.
There's always room for improvement, but yes Europeans really are and were great and magnificent. For example the continents of Africa and Asia were dirt poor when Europeans first arrived with life expectancies in the 30s or 40s and high child mortality , but thanks to Europeans spreading their science and technology , those lands had their life expectancy rise 20 years and child mortality dropped 90% by the time Europeans left.So Europeans not only saved many times more lives due to their conquest than they killed , they also made those countries better and owe them nothing.

>>212510999 (OP)
>trips
And it depended on master to master. Lots of slaves had decent times on the plantation and their masters actually gave a shit about their wellbeing. But I'm judging this based off the 1930s interviews of ex slaves, so people who lived to their 80s and 90s. Even in the slave narratives we have from the 30s, they often mention how the other plantations treated theirs much worse. The ones who got mistreated definitely didn't live as long.

>>212511734
he probably deserved it. YOU probably deserve it.

The end of slavery has been a disaster for civilization. Read George Fitzhugh

Holy fuck I hate jews.

>>212510999 (OP)
What's he running from?

>>212510999 (OP)
Slavery throughout history wasn't like people think, it was more akin to modern employment. You had off-hours, families, and could even own your own shit. That's how some people bought their own freedom. People who got hopelessly in debt or just sucked at life could sell themselves into slavery or a period of indentured servitude as a solution. This is why the Bible isn't trying to hide whole slavery thing as you would if it were wall-to-wall abuse and evil.

You could be punished to extract the value owed, but it would be counterproductive to physically disable them in the process.

Having said that, just look at how lazy and stupid niggers are now and you can understand why a few needed to get literally whipped into shape to get any useful productivity out of them.

>>212517746
>come up with an objection where you predict cultural-social model will fit the data better than the genetic model
>get shown that the genetic model actually fits the data better
>call it semantics
>can't show any counter argument that a social-cultural model explains the data better than a genetic model
>get more and more impotently angry and resort to desperate, hollow insults

lol, lmao.

>We can equate genes to the connections passed on, to the ideas and religions passed on.
>nepotism you stupid fucking retard holy shit you have to be the most autistic sperg irl

lol, how does this "nepotism" model predict that for example
the correlation in socioeconomic status between a man and his uncle will be the same as the correlation in socioeconomic status between a man and his grandfather? Or that that the correlation in socioeconomic status between a man and his cousin will be the same as the correlation in socioeconoomic status between a man and his great grandfather?

The genetic model of socioeconomic success, first stated by Fischer in 1918, predicts these specific correlation relations exactly , 100 years before the data had been gathered, see page 3 and >>212516439


You just saying "it's nepotism" doesn't make any specific prediction about the correlational structure of the data , does it? You'd probably even predict that cousins would have more of a nepotism effect than great-grandfathers, since great grandfathers are often dead or not actively working and so less able to help a man get a job than their older cousin , and so a man and his cousins ought to be more correlated with socioeconomic success than a man and his grandfather.

Understand which is the better model now? the one which actually predicts the exact results observed rather than the one-word model that doesn't make any specific predictions observed in the results?
lol

>>212510999 (OP)
Inadvertently the presence of slavery is what drove so many groups in America, including whites, to fight as hard as possible for their rights. Everyone saw what the bottom looked like and scrambled up the ladder in horror.

>>212517746
and lol you still haven;'t come up with a rebuttal for >>212515714
>For example an "wealth gets passed on" environmental model would reason that because wealth during childhood is so important for the adult outcomes of children, then a middle income family that has only 1 or 2 children where the parents can spend a lot of money on each of child should have children that end up much more successful than a middle income family that has only 6 or 10 or 12 children. But in reality, whether you have one kid that you spend tonnes of money on or 12 kids that you spend 12 times less money on , your kids will end up basically the same levels of success as adults. If you have 12 kids your kids would only end up 7% less successful than if you had 1 kid.
>This result what would you would expect to observe if success in adulthood is mainly caused by inherited genetic characteristics of mental ability and temperament but is the opposite of what you would expect to observe if success in adulthood is mainly caused by how wealthy your upbringing is and how much money is spent on you.

either.

>>212517811
hahaha your post totally fails to respond to the argument the post made. here it is again so people can see the argument you ran from because you know you have no answer.

>For example a genetic model of socioeconomic success would predict that no matter how many children you have , they'll be equally successful as adults on average because whether you have one child or 10+ children they all share your genes to the same degree

>Whereas cultural-environmental models of socioeconomic success would predict that if you have one or two kids then you can invest much more time and money into raising them and giving them advantages and so parents who have fewer kids will end up with kids who are more much successful as adults than parents who have tonnes of kids.

>But this isn't true for average income families, having 12 kids will only end up with kids 7% less successful on average than having 1 kid.
>So the effect of investing more time and money into your kids is very small in comparison to the effect simply of the genetics they inherit.

can you show how your cultural-environmental "childhood wealth matters to the adult success of children" model you claimed in >>212515068 is not refuted by these results?
lol

>>212518597
The negro compliance engine

>>212518112
not just kings, the result holds for lower and upper classes, although the upper classes .

also look at the pictures of >>212518876 vs >>212516439

the genetic model of socioeconomic success proposed by RA Fischer 100 years ago predicts that the correlation in socioeconomic status between a man and his uncle will be the same as the correlation in socioeconomic status between a man and his grandfather and that the correlation in socioeconomic status between a man and his cousin will be the same as the correlation in socioeconoomic status between a man and his great grandfather and the same for a man and his brother compared with a man and his father , etc.

fischer predicted this from genetic relationships 100 years ago and it fits the data extremely well.

when a model predicts something very specific in advance of observing the data, that gives you reason to believe in the model.

>>212518876
>every man exists in a vacuum, he receives nothing from his parents but physical genetics and hard cash
>pretending to be a man of science
listen faggot, just because you can't track data like nepotism or just because there's other hard data that is easier to track(genetics, wealth) doesn't mean the data doesn't influence the (successful/unsuccessful) conclusion data that you're basing all these assumptions about people on. I can agree with you that the apple does not fall far from the tree but you're sitting here saying the orchard doesn't exist and doesn't influence the data. Maybe that was a little too abstract for your retarded mind?

>>212518913
You've still refused to demonstrate that you understand the first thing about how society works besides 'genetics' and 'wealth spent on you while you were a kid', flat out admitting you can't track the data and therefore your study is correct because it uses data that can be tracked. For a le man of le science you are absolutely fucking retarded.

>>212519229
>>212519029
samefagging over and over isn't going to help your case, you have multiple times admitted to the flaws in the study as if they are something to be proud of and look past

>well I can't measure that data so it doesn't exist
k

honestly man re-reading your posts and seeing you do all these insane mental gymnastics just so you can say you are wealthy not because of your parents but because of your genetics is really sad, I'm sure you'll do something useful one day

>>212519369
Kill yourself.

>>212511734
> "Ten days from to-day I left the plantation, run away from massa."
>"What made you run away, Peter; was your master ugly—did he whip you?"
>With a peculiar shrug of his shoulders, and raising his eyes toward the ceiling he shouted, "Lor Gor Almighty Massa! look here"—and suiting the action to the word, he pulled down the pile of dirty rags that half concealed his back, and which was once a shirt, and exhibited his mutilated sable form to the crowd of officers and others present in the office.
>"Who whipped you, Peter?"
>"Overseer Artayon Carrier whipped me—I don't remember the whipping. I was two months in bed sore from the whipping and salt brine, which Overseer put on my back. By and by my senses began to come—they said I was sort of crazy, and tried to shoot everybody. I did not know it—I did not know that I had attempted to shoot any one—they told me so. I burned up all my clothes, but I don't remember that. I never was this way (crazy) before. I don't know what make me come that way (crazy). My master came after I was whipped—saw me in bed. He discharged the overseer. They told me I attempted to shoot my wife first one. I did not shoot any one. I did not harm any one. My wife tell me I no do these things when I come away. She thought I was dead with whipping. My master's name is Captain John Lyon [sic], cotton planter, on Atchafalaya River, near Washington, La. I was whipped two months before Christmas."
Hmmm

>>212519409
little too accurate eh? at first I thought you were just some white trash shitter who thought he was better than black people and low class but I realized after a bit that you're just some eurotrash type faggot who needs to justify having inherited wealth

>>212517356
no more arguments lmao

>>212517436
>After being freed, most just stayed around their plantations and kept working.

Look up learned helplessness and you might figure out why. Or maybe ask yourself what jobs someone can apply for who has never done anything else than pick cotton, who can't read or write, and who's hated by every whitey in town.

>>212514665
but that's exactly what the movies is trying to convince us about.

>>212519265
>>212519299
>I can't make any specific predictions based on my nepotism model but you should believe that my model is right anyway.

lol you don't even realise how retarded what you're saying is.

imagine one person creates a model for how weather works based on air pressure and it's able to predict the observations weather observations in a data set with high accuracy.
But then someone else comes along and says "no, that's wrong weather is obviously determined by temperature. air pressure is just a proxy for temperature "
So the first person says " ok well the air pressure model predicts the data very well? Does your model predict the data better? what specific predictions does your model make"
and the second person says " I don't know. My model can't make any predictions. no matter what data I observed, I'd say my model was correct. But you should still believe that my model is correct!"
Would you have more confidence in the first man's pressure model of weather that makes specific, accurate predictions or would you have more confidence in the second man's temperature model of weather that doesn't make any specific , accurate predictions?

This is what you're doing when you say that the genetic model in >>212515714 is wrong because actually it's all nepotism but when challenged in >>212518876 you can't produce any specific predictions about the data that predict the results very accurately, like the genetic model does.

>>212519265

your response to >>212518913 is even more pathetic. your original environmental model about wealth getting passed on flat out predicts the opposite of what is actually observed in the data and the genetic model predicts the the results far more accurately, and instead of admitting this you just blather excuses about something else being the real cause even you haven't provided any data that this something else accounts for the observations and even though saying "it must be something else" is still admitting that your original model you claimed in >>212515068 is wrong

>>212510999 (OP)
this is 10/10 the dumbest most retarded thread I ever seen here. Have /tv/ finally reached /pol/ levels of retardation?

>>212517356
lel seethe you unargumented faggot

>>212518487
then why dont you take the lead and become a slave? You can be my slave if you want. Ill treat you good I promise

>>212510999 (OP)
most of the slaveowners were jews

>As life goes he has been a lucky mortal. He was taken away from Dahomey and Ashantee — to be a slave indeed, but a slave to a less cruel master than he would have found at home. He had a bad time of it occasionally, and the plantation whip and the branding irons are not all dreams, yet his owner cared for him at least as much as he cared for his cows and his horses. Kind usage to animals is more economical than barbarity, and Englishmen in the West Indies were rarely inhuman. Lord Eodney says : ' I have been often in all the West India Islands, and I have often made my observations on the treatment of the negro slaves, and can aver that I never knew the least cruelty inflicted on them, but that in general they lived better than the honest day-labouring man in England, without doing a fourth part of his work in a day, and I am fully convinced that the negroes in our islands are better provided for and live better than when in Guinea.' Eodney, it is true, was a man of facts and was defective in sentiment. Let us suppose him wrong, let us believe the worst horrors of the slave trade or slave usage as fluent tongue of missionary or demagogue has described them, yet nevertheless, when we consider what the lot of common humanity has been

>>212511734
>a single photograph without any background context
>ZOMG THIS MEANS THIS HOLLYWOOD MOVIE IS 100% TRUE

>>212512712
>pick cotton for 12 hours a day everyday until you die
slaves did not work these many hours.

>>212519484
Typical dindu behaviour, some things never change.
Most of the colonialism=bad, white man=bad is absolute horseshit designed to guilt trip whites into handing over their money.

>>212520642

You are just scandalized by your most dogmatic beliefs being called into question. You should read more to broaden your horizons. You seem narrow-minded.

>>212511734
why didn't they just pick the goddamn cotton? it's only 6 months of work spread over multiple harvesting periods. there's people TODAY doing backbreaking labour for 14 hour days in worse conditions and no one cares, while also living hand to mouth. they just watch marvel slop instead of singing negro spirituals. Bitch ass nigga.

>>212517573
Did the slaves sign some contract then?

>>212520642
This thread is full of intelligent and thoughtful posts. You just sound butthurt. This is a (you) problem.

>>212517436
Likely because vagrancy laws were introduced as a response to slave emancipation. When its illegal to not have a home and you have no money, options are kinda limited.

Am I on MPC? SA? NRX? What's with the sudden influx of nerds posting high effort deboonks of obvious common sense stuff, with sources cited and whatnot? This is not typical of /tv/. Something is afoot.

>>212520725
A lot of people would willingly sell themselves into slavery at this point if it met certain conditions. How many 4chan losers would happily move in and be the house servant/ gardener of some nice rich family?

>>212510999 (OP)
>Most of the things recorded by slave owning southerners from this period suggests they were a very pious, gentle people who cared for the welfare of their subjects
INCOMING TRVTHBOMB LIBTARDS I AM VERY SMART

>>212521403
>A lot of people would willingly sell themselves into slavery

then why I never see white slaves in them american paintings or even photos?

>>212521555
This but unironically

>>212510999 (OP)
Kinda funny how posts like theses are considered memes before retards start believing its true.

>>212510999 (OP)
Well said, Ivan.

>>212520231
>genetic data will accurately predict data like your grandfather getting you a job with his buddy

you've completely lost the plot, go back to chatting with chatgpt

>>212514534
No! I will NOT support Israel!

>five from the last seven posts are from discord trannies and other lefty freaks
The memo was sent, then. The triggering with these threads is always on

>>212522832
>The fact that a genetic model specifically predict that a man's socioeconomic success will be equally correlated with his uncle as with his grand father , and that a man's socioeconomic status will be equally correlated with his cousin as with his great grandfather
doesn't mean anything!
>so what if a model makes specific predictions before ever seeing the data ! that doesn't give you reason to believe the model is true!

lol keep crying and eating shit , poor retard.

>>212510999 (OP)
checked, it's typical kike fairy tale, nigger pity party shit. slaves were typically only whipped if they ran away or acted out heinously, they were very expensive, it would be like slamming the door of your new car into a wall. they were there to do a job and the typical relationship was amicable

>>212523172
seriously nailed it at
>>212519513
literally these schizo tier gymnastics to say this correlation between genetics and being successful is a direct causation while ignoring the obvious direct correlation that is nepotism, you are definitely eurotrash new money and your website is gay - also, found you on reddit, you should stay there

>>212523539
only insults and adhominem fallacies, no counter argument to >>212520231 or >>212523172 , lol

hey retard, which model do you have more reason to believe in? One which makes specific, accurate predictions about the data in advance of ever observing the data or one which doesn't make any specific , accurate predictions?
lol
poor pleb retard. Notice the difference? I'm providing an argument for why I'm right and you're wrong and then insulting you afterwards, whereas you're only providing empty insults while running from the argument you know you can't win.

>>212523682
You're arguing with a dishonest jew.

>>212523539
>while ignoring the obvious direct correlation that is nepotism
see >>212518876

>lol, how does this "nepotism" model predict that for example
>the correlation in socioeconomic status between a man and his uncle will be the same as the correlation in socioeconomic status between a man and his grandfather? Or that that the correlation in socioeconomic status between a man and his cousin will be the same as the correlation in socioeconoomic status between a man and his great grandfather?

>The genetic model of socioeconomic success, first stated by Fischer in 1918, predicts these specific correlation relations exactly , 100 years before the data had been gathered, see page 3 and >>212516439 (You)


>You just saying "it's nepotism" doesn't make any specific prediction about the correlational structure of the data , does it? You'd probably even predict that cousins would have more of a nepotism effect than great-grandfathers, since great grandfathers are often dead or not actively working and so less able to help a man get a job than their older cousin , and so a man and his cousins ought to be more correlated with socioeconomic success than a man and his grandfather.

>Understand which is the better model now? the one which actually predicts the exact results observed rather than the one-word model that doesn't make any specific predictions observed in the results?
>lol

>>212523682
You've devolved into nothing but projection now, completely flinging shit while constantly referencing the same shit that you claim hasn't been refuted. Seriously take a step back, you've pretending to be someone else multiple times in this thread to defend your own paper, you've literally posted the same graph multiple, you're refusing to acknowledge every step of the way that by refusing to acknowledge the nepotism correlation you have essentially tainted your own study and in doing so have doomed yourself to this obnoxious denial-posting going on where you pretend you aren't actually doubling down on being retarded

>>212523721
Ah yes because dishonest jews are known so well for claiming that nepotism is how people get successful

>>212523721
according to the brilliant author of the study at milkyeggs.com, Jews own so much and control so much not because of nepotism but because of genetics, because they are just that superior to you, really could not have self owned any harder

>>212519484
>"Overseer Artayon Carrier whipped me—I don't remember the whipping. I was two months in bed sore from the whipping and salt brine, which Overseer put on my back

This sounds absolutely awful until you take a moment to realize that if some nigger kicked your as today nobody is going to give you two months time off from work with no worries about paying bills or paying rent while you recover.

>>212523791
can you answer in what way your "It's nepotism" model makes specific predictions like the genetic model makes in >>212523748 ?

If your "It's nepotism" cultural-environmental model doesn't make specific predictions more accurately than the genetic model then why should anyone believe that model is true over the genetic model?

seems like you're refusing to answer questions about the argument because you know you can't refute the argument that's been presented to you.

>>212518349
two assumptions in one post lmao. the state of 4chan today

>>212510999 (OP)
Probably the lamest Best Picture Winner. Just SAW or August Underground except with racism and a bunch of miscast theater kids as Southern working men. Protagonist has no agency whatsoever and then in the end Brad Pitt comes down from Crackaland to save him. To top it all off we don't even get a hot Michael Fassbender Lupita Nyongo rape scene.

>>212523916
the author of the study is the economist Gregory Clark, you retard. milkyeggs is just reposting paper.

And yes, Ashkenazi jews have an average IQ of 110, north east asians have an average IQ of 105, white people have an average IQ of 100, blacks have an average IQ of 85 and all of these differences in average IQ are in large part due to genetics.

>>212524004
What the fuck are you asking for, you're actually retarded
>uhhh well can you prove nepotism exists? can you accurately predict something with a model that says nepotism exists??? uhh I can't seemingly think of a world where people who are successful get their uncharismatic children who have literally never accomplished anything in their lives big jobs that they wouldn't have landed otherwise, all those nepo babies in hollywood literally are just have that good of genetics and are that good at acting! gotcha!
dude you cannot actually be this retarded

>>212524174
so you're saying you're a jew defending nepotism as nonexistent on /tv/

lol I love this place

>>212524180
So you're admitting "it's nepotism" model can't make any specific, accurate predictions about anything, unlike the genetic model of socioeconomic success proposed by RA Fischer 100 years ago that predicts that the correlation in socioeconomic status between a man and his uncle will be the same as the correlation in socioeconomic status between a man and his grandfather and that the correlation in socioeconomic status between a man and his cousin will be the same as the correlation in socioeconoomic status between a man and his great grandfather and the same for a man and his brother compared with a man and his father , etc.

fischer predicted this from genetic relationships 100 years ago and it fits the data extremely well. see pic >>212523172

when a model accurately predicts something very specific in advance of observing the data, that gives you reason to believe in the model.

In the same way that when Halley used newtonian mechanics to predict when the comet (that would later be named after him) would return near earth , that provided reason to believe in the model of newtonian mechanics.

>> can you prove nepotism exists?
I'm not denying nepotism exists, I'm saying that your model that socioeconomic success is caused by nepotism doesn't make any specific , accurate predictions about socioeconomic success, unlike the Fischerian genetic model, which makes very accurate predictions. So there is more reason to believe that the genetic model is true and is much more important to socioeconomic success than the "success is caused by nepotism" model.

In the exact same way that if you had two models for how the weather worked, one based on air pressure that made accurate predictions, and another based on humidity that didn't make any specific predictions, you'd have more reason to believe in the former than the latter.

slavery is America's original sin.

>>212511858
Hopefully she cried on your penis afterwards

>>212524180
How can danger be real if fear is a choice?

>>212524267
I'm not jewish nor denying that nepotism exists, I'm just posting the truth shown by the research >>212515714 that environmental and cultural explanations are much less important to socioeconomic success in typical societies than genetics.

>>212524712
If it is simply relying on the marriage certificates, how does it specifically correlate with genetics? Does inbred people get more money? What about genetic abnormalities? What's the "distance" with that?

>>212514702
>Slavery is abuse by definition.
The creation of slavery was the first act of humanitarianism in human history, signifying the moment when for the first time, the conquering tribe decided that they would have mercy on the tribe they had subjugated and take the risk of keeping them alive to perform labor rather than simply slaughtering them all and throwing their bodies into a pit as had been the norm previously.

>>212515355
>how dare you care more about your own culture's history and past mistakes than the history and past mistakes of other groups?
I thought Eurocentrism was something bad that should be minimized and avoided in modern curriculums?

>>212510999 (OP)
Slaves were very expensive, and less than 5% of Americans owned one at its peak. For bonus points they were supplied with plenty of pussy for eugenics breeding of more slaves.

>>212525041
Fischer's genetic model of socioeconomic success makes specific predictions about how correlated two relatives should be in terms of their socioeconomic success due to how genetically similar they are see pic >>212516439
When the data to test this model was gathered 100 years later, the predictions matched the data extremely well, see pic>>212523172

>If it is simply relying on the marriage certificates, how does it specifically correlate with genetics?
officially recorded ancestry from church records correlate extremely highly with actual ancestry (and hence genetics) because genetic cuckolding only happens in a small minority of cases and would only introduce a little bit of noise. The pattern is so strong and the model fit is so good that even even with this little bit of noise very strong evidence for the genetic model is found due to the genetic model making such accurate predictions about the data.

>Does inbred people get more money?
no, that's not what the model predicts. you can read what the model predicts here .
https://milkyeggs.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/ClarkGlasgow2021.pdf
the model predicts that more genetically similar relations are more closely correlated in terms of their socioeconoomic success, not that more genetically similar relations are more socioeconomically successful.
>What about genetic abnormalities? What's the "distance" with that?
distance basically refers to how much blood you share. a child receive half its; genes from it's mother and half from it's father. This is also true for that child's child, so a child receives on average 1/4 of it's genes from each of its 4 grandparents.
So a child is twice as distant from one of its grand parents as from one of its parents.
This is the basic idea but it is made more complicated due to assortative mating, which the paper explains
so genetic abnormalities don't impact how distant two relatives are

>>212522832
>genetic data will accurately predict data like your grandfather getting you a job with his buddy
>you've completely lost the plot, go back to chatting with chatgpt
Why do you think the ability to successfully socially network and get a job with your buddy is magically distinct from your genes?

>>212525526
Yeah so nice of the conquerors to have mercy on their victims.

>>212523824
>Ah yes because dishonest jews are known so well for claiming that nepotism is how people get successful
The Jew's entire anti-racism libel against my race is based on claiming my race is only successful through nepotism.

>>212521767
erasure of history. there were huge amounts. plenty sold themselves into bondage for a passage to the new world

>>212524098
This nigga actually watched the movie LOL
Really though that's a nice review

>>212526318
So? Is he wrong? Would you rather be a slave or murdered?

>>212526318
>Yeah so nice of the conquerors to have mercy on their victims.
Yes?
Are you saying that wasn't nice of them? They should have just kept slaughtering them?

>>212521767
just look up "indentured servant" or "indentured"

>>212511832
Slaves were treated better than for example Irish identured servants in British colonies, because a slave even in the most callous view is a reasonably valuable piece of livestock, and someone in indentured servitude is a rental that you have to maximise the 5 years of value from (so you work them to death)

>>212525526
first act would be not eating them where you killed them

>>212522767
Ivanposting is not only the best meme to emerge since 2022, it is also the only thing that makes me laugh anymore. Thank you for your service, airman.

Words really are amazing.
All you have to is call it chattel slavery and suddenly giving slaves enough idle time, freedom and independence to mingle and start their own families can be written off as the most immoral and cruel and contemptible form of slavery in human history.

>>212511959
To be fair some niggers do abuse their animals purely for the "enjoyment", but if you're in that business you're unlucky to kick the shit out of your cows for fun

>>212511734
actually it was a good thing that the nigger got hurt this badly, still we whites are civilized and gentle children of the lord

>go see this with my parents in theaters
>dad gets hammered drunk
>starts laughing at serious scenes during the movie
>starts to sing with Solomon with they sing the slave song
I've never been so embarrassed in my entire life but thinking back on it now, sounds pretty based

>>212527034
thats how it be

>>212511832
>He didn't get beat for nothing
except you can't beat someone for doing bad work today without being sued for it anon, the beating is the point.

>>212512520
weren't they worried about infection from the welts? I can believe a hard slap or a switch to the tip of your fingers but straight up whipping seems reckless.

>>212520763
>spouting this when every anon is saying he probably deserved it.
I forget that this shithole's population is 80% underaged thirdworld inbreds.

>>212512712
>pick cotton for 12 hours a day everyday until you die
Do you not understand how crop cycles work?

>>212512851
>a family friend that you owned
kek that must have been weird as fuck

>>212511959
I've seen men beat the shit out of their own expensive car because they couldn't figure out how to fix it anon, you're acting like retarded, impulsive or malicious men don't exist.

>>212513206
what's your point? The other anon said it was a horrific time, you pointed out that horrific times were standard for ages already, an obvious fact that does not take away from what he said. Slavery in fact still exists today in many forms and not just wageslavery. None of that makes it more palatable.

>>212512712
Neolibs really be like
>Working a job and paying rent to slumlords isnt that bad
I'd love to be an Uncle Ben and keep the nice shiny mansion nice and tidy for my owner who feeds me and doesn't make me pay rent. He'd probably set me up with a nice girl too.

>>212514360
>magically
kek I know this is bait but some people probably look at stuff like this and bananas and think this.

>>212511734
Friendly reminder blacks are prone to keloid scars like this which make minor wounds seem egregious
I remember little black girls in school and church had these weird pea-sized alien growths on their earlobes

>>212526918
Saying the nigger word doesn't make you fit in here, we all know you have to use a regex for it because actually typing it out would give you the ick and make your peepee squirm

>>212514741
>if it wasn't me it would be someone worse

Is this seriously your argument anon? What about the ones born in America?

>>212515483
>nothing to say

Go cry into a pillow Gladys

>>212528333
>immediately thinks about dicks squirming

>>212528107
Why not go live in a commune then?

uncle tom’s cabin and it’s consequences have resulted in irreparable damage to societal hierarchy

>>212511734
he must have been the laziest nigga on earth

>>212516210
NTA, but honest question as a fellow euro, what do you hope for England? Your urban areas like many in Europe haven't been white for ages, it's not like you can go back and magic it back to how it was. Even if I agreed with you, the best you could do is stem immigration now but if all your problems were to be caused by bad immigration how are you going to legally kick anyone out? And which ones? From my own experience it's more often second or third generation people enclaved in their culture bubble that cause problems and they've been legal citizens forever and just as much as any white person. It just seems like a fantasy to think you can turn the clock back on any country that has had heavy immigration, ie all of Western Europe post-WW2. In my country a lot of far right politicians are talking about somehow stripping citizenship and nationality from repeat delinquents but not once are they ever specific about how to do it or even who exactly to do it to, it's all just pandering and oversimplifying on both sides.

>>212511734
>and one day, for no reason at all, massa started whippin’

>>212527662
and youre acting like owning a car is unethical because a small minority of owners abuse them.

>>212528836
nah, I don't agree with the car analogy at all, I was just adressing the fault in your reasoning even if we had admitted as truth that slaves were seen as expensive equipment.
Like the other anon said, from the moment you own someone you are by definition abusing them by depriving them of every basic freedom. No matter how good you treat a slave and how much better he has it then if he had been a free corpse in the African savanna, it's still slavery. This is pretty basic stuff. It's not about results, it's about the moral principles. It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't generational slavery imo, if it had been just that one-off generation of imported slaves and their children had been born free, then you could arguably say that their lifetime of slavery was some form of debt payment for giving their children better lives, but being born into slavery fucks all that up.

It's pretty easy to transpose onto your life as well. If some rich emirate prince abducted you and had you work on his cumranch to wipe his shit off of OF sluts, but in exchange you got to experience luxury, fuck his leftovers, travel, a fine education and a meaning to your life (you make his life easier, thus furthering the future of humanity by facilitating the work of a member of a superior race), would you agree per your own reasoning that it's morally OK since that situation is objectively better than your current actual life of shitposting and probably some standard office job where you will die alone and a virgin? I'm only caricaturing your situation to the extent you did the African slave btw, do not take this as some lazy attempt ot bait you.

>all this build up about the patty roller and they never actually show it
So what do you think it was?
Some kind of rolling steam powered slave catching machine, or did they literally just mean the nigger getting caught in a kitchen appliance for rolling patties?

>>212529279
>Like the other anon said, from the moment you own someone you are by definition abusing them by depriving them of every basic freedom.
That other anon was a moron, there's no such thing as "basic freedom". Those blacks weren't being denied anything, if they had remained in Africa there's a good chance they wouldn't have even have survived to have had children free or otherwise in the first place due to the nature of African slavery.

The idea of "basic freedom" is an Anglo-Saxon and occasionally Gallic folly, that rest of the world only plays along with when it is to their benefit then swiftly abandon the moment it inconveniences them.

>>212529900
>there's no such thing as "basic freedom"
nigger the USA as a country is founded in ''basic freedom'' as are most other civilized countries or at least they pretend it is, how dense are you? The only way slavery is justifiable is if you were alive and doing it at the time.

Ugh, you are deliberately missing the point on every post, well done anon I am now mad. Even if you are not our viewpoints are too far apart to make any conversation meaningful, might as well talk to my cat for all we are both getting out of this.

>>212511734
Well what did he do?

>>212528501
Not wrong neverthoughless

>>212529279
You always have a choice. You can always escape or revolt and kill massa if youre that outraged at your lot in life. Some did, but not many, because most had it good.

>>212529279
>It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't generational slavery imo, if it had been just that one-off generation of imported slaves and their children had been born free, then you could arguably say that their lifetime of slavery was some form of debt payment for giving their children better lives, but being born into slavery fucks all that up.
What's wrong with a debt payment being spread over 2 or more generations? What a strange allowance to make. If it's okay once then it's okay twice.

>>212531588
I regret ever engaging with you anon.

>>212531508
That's precisely why slavery is in the soul and certain groups are born slaves. You literally cannot enslave certain kinds of people *cough, aryans* because they will sooner die but other races don't have that inborn feeling and are often better off being enslaved. It is what it is and I did not make the rules, I just observe the facts

>14 hours of "slavery was like totally lit guise"

>>212512855
Tranny fingers typed this post

>>212531908
see >>212514626

>>212532003
nah

>>212515836
Ameriniggers have 15 higher IQ points then their African ancestors sweaty

>>212531836
Whites were and are enslaved same as any other race. Harems, jannisaries. As well as the aforementioned indenturees. Listen, I like us too, but you're being silly.

>>212531836
This, it's rather obvious that God created Africans in the first place for the idiotic services only they are capable of providing to the global economy, like dredging sand out of rivers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mU1IdB7rv70&pp=0gcJCfwAo7VqN5tD

>>212530663
Chronic masturbator. Never got anything done.

>>212511734
Shit man I saw a black guy kill a white person - I guess all blacks are violent psychopathic murderers!

>>212532151
Whites =/= aryans slavs are just as enslavable as arabs

>>212525041
Oh god, it's retarded.