On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 05:43:16 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:44:42 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

At least you haven't suggested that blacks were
better off being enslaved, as did Greg.

As Harry would say, your reading comprehension is flawed.

I entered this thread after you said this:
"So you really think the civil war was worth the cost?
It certainly wasn't for black people. They were worse off
in the south for the first 40-50 years and it took almost
100 years for it to just get a little better."

There's only one way to read that.


I never said they were better off being enslaved but I do say without
a divisive war their freedom and integration into society would have
been better if there was a financial incentive to let them go. If the
plantation owners could not sell "slave" cotton, they would find
another way to grow cotton that did not involve slaves.
We keep ignoring the fact that most of these former slaves ended up
picking cotton anyway and at slave wages.

WTF? You haven't given any thought to what it means to be
enslaved. Maybe you think black people can "naturally"
accept being slaves. I can't teach you empathy.
Your alternative history goes against the facts.
The rebs wanted that war, and they got it.

At a certain point you have to define slavery. If someone is trapped
economically the difference between that and indenture is minimal.
The plantation owner's whip was simply replaced with the ability to
deny employment.
You are also trying to impose 21st century morality on an 18th century
America.
Perhaps you are thinking that things immediately got a whole lot
better for blacks in 1865. There are plenty of people who will tell
you they did not get better by 1965.
I know we all watch the movies like Django and Roots but for most of
these people, this was just a job and they were treated better than a
sweat shop worker or a coal miner up north. At the end of the day,
they were "property" not just an expendable employee and replacing
them cost the owner money, unlike getting a new Irishman who were
coming over on the boat every day.
I understand they couldn't quit but neither could most of the "wage
slaves". Not if they wanted to eat.
Maybe Harry will pull the string on one of his "before the unions"
rants.