Reparations for slavery.

Discussion in 'Your Bloody Soap Box' started by garage sale GT, Jun 16, 2020.

  1. garage sale GT

    garage sale GT New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    1,658
    Likes Received:
    3
    While the details I've worked out may be found lacking by serious historians, the blockade of Southern shipping by the North, the South's embargo of its own cotton, and the destruction of the Southern economy by Sherman mean we should not take for granted that all of today's American blacks are actually the descendants of slaves.

    Many if not most slaves may have starved to death during the war. Food may have been shorter in the South than the history books tell. Besides that, many slaves were probably sold during the war so the South could buy weapons. The blacks we have today may be in part descended from replacements secretly brought in with the government's help so the South could continue to be the source of the nation's cash exports.

    The slaves could have been replaced in postwar generations by large Southern landowners who needed a workforce, didn't want to pay free men, and might have hated the free men of the South for helping lose the war. Rich industrialists might have also brought in a few. Colonial Africa might have been a much worse place than the racist US at the time and might have looked attractive to some Africans even if they knew our society would not treat them as equals at the time. Deals might have been made between the US government and some of the Southern planters even before the end of the war to help them rebuild their economy and keep the South exporting the agricultural goods which gave the US its trade surplus.

    The replacements could have come from Liberia, or they could have been schooled in how to talk like ex slaves by Liberians. They could have been running from colonial oppression like the Belgian Congo or German Angola or tribal warfare, starvation, or disease. They would have paid to learn how to talk like Americans.

    If the government aided and abetted large southern landowners in re-establishing the nation's cash exports, they may also have aided them by getting Segregation passed into law until the slaves' replacements learned to speak without foreign accents. Maybe I'm obsessed with my theory but when I hear recordings of civil rights leaders speak of segregation when it was still in living memory, they seem to be hiding something.

    It is well known that the South tried to practice "Cotton Diplomacy" by embargoing its own cotton crop from Europe. There were also said to be vigilance committees of Southerners who blocked cotton exports in order to manipulate the value of certain bonds. They probably had to import at least some of their food even in good times because it may have made more sense to do so than to grow food on land that was well suited to more lucrative crops. If there was no money coming in, there would have been no way to buy food. The North also blockaded Southern ports which would have hampered all exports and imports.

    The rich plantation owners would have realized they should sell their slaves if they could. If they didn't get money for weapons, they were probably going to lose and have to give the slaves up for free. They knew they could always buy more slaves after the war even on credit because it was known the South was good for making money. The South would not be able to export goods grown by slaves until after they won the war.

    The slaves could have run both the Southern and the Northern blockades easier than other goods. Neither side was able to devote much manpower to the blockades. Bales of cotton and hogsheads of tobacco need to be loaded onto ships in ports but slaves could walk and be rowed out to waiting ships in small boats. They might have been sold throughout Latin America and the Caribbean. Perhaps the war would have ended sooner if this had not been taking place.

    The Emancipation Proclamation may have been an attempt to render the slaves less salable to governments that had not yet recognized the Confederacy, in order to deprive the Union's enemy of gold which they could use to buy weapons.

    Sherman's march may have also been an attempt to break the slave pens so the slaves could not be sold. It destroyed much of the South's economy so it would have worsened starvation. Sherman's soldiers probably weren't carrying or foraging enough food to feed all the runaway slaves. It may have happened after the Emancipation Proclamation but the slaves might still have been valuable on the black market.
     
    Tags:


  2. garage sale GT

    garage sale GT New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    1,658
    Likes Received:
    3
    There is a reason the food shortage may have been worse than anyone thinks.

    Cotton Diplomacy may not have been so much about getting Europe to help the Confederacy or manipulating the worth of cotton backed war bonds as it was about the rest of the South not trusting the rich plantation owners, who controlled most of the exportable cotton.

    The plantation owners often were the great grandsons of British loyalists. Their sons went to West Point and became the leadership of the Confederacy after Secession. They may not have cared about the values in the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, or whatever the Confederacy said it believed in. They may have wanted to return to an alliance with Great Britain or maybe another royal power like Spain which was not yet hostile to slavery, in order to obtain a powerful defensive military alliance.

    Or, the rich planters may simply have wanted to bring back settlers along with the guns they planned to buy with the cotton crop. They could bring technically trained men from educated but overcrowded European countries who could help give the Confederacy an industrial base as well as a militia for defense and for controlling the slaves. If the rich planters had won the war, they could have then squeezed out the previous militia, the small farmers, and replanted their land with cash crops, thus increasing their holdings and power.

    So if the rest of the South didn't trust the planters, they might have kept the planters from exporting any of their cotton even when people were starting to starve and it was clear Europe wasn't going to help. Come to think of it, the South must have realized before they started that Europe wouldn't cave because the pressure would be greater on the South because they were going to be at war.

    It is said the Confederates in Lee's invasion of the North in 1863 subsisted on apples foraged from Northern fields. It was probably not an isolated incident, being one of the most important campaigns of the war.

    So, no cotton went out, consequently no money or food went in, consequently, the slaves were starving while at the same time not being good for anything until the war was over because of the Northern blockade and Cotton Diplomacy. So, why not sell them? They would be easier to secretly load onto ships than bales of cotton and they wouldn't need a port.

    Suppose though, that the rich planters didn't like it one bit and said, "if you make us sell our slaves, we'll get you some new ones after the war." So one additional reason they might have repopulated the plantations is spite.
     
    #2 garage sale GT, Jun 18, 2020
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2020
  3. Froze

    Froze Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,537
    Likes Received:
    352
    So what?

    When I asked that question it's not because I'm supporting slavery, or cruelty to another race, it's just that history had sad and unfortunate times. Should Israel go after Egypt for being slaves way back in time? Blacks were slaves in Africa long before they got shipped to other countries, oh, no one wants to talk about that. One African tribe would attack another and the winner either took the losing tribe as slaves or sold them to other tribes! It was black slave traders that sold their own kind to the Europeans and America! Oh, let's not talk about that.

    In fact instead of throwing rocks at me read this instead and learn some real history; WARNING: what you are about to read will shock ALL of you, if you are scared of the truth don't read it, this is stuff I've know about for many years, and someone wrote a very informative and historically fact based paper on it, and now it's available for you all to read, bookmark it and have others read it:

    https://thetruthwillprevailblog.wor...slavery-of-different-races-through-the-years/

    Now you understand, I hope; how far back do we need to keep going with this crap, there should be NO reparations for slavery just as it has been no reparations for thousands of years.

    Now if you want to talk about civil rights, fine, there are issues there, but reparations should be off the table. But since this post wasn't about civil rights I won't go into that here.
     
  4. Froze

    Froze Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    4,537
    Likes Received:
    352
  5. garage sale GT

    garage sale GT New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    1,658
    Likes Received:
    3
    The Marshall Plan 1865:

    How does the US rebuild the war torn South? The Federal Government had not yet gotten the people to consent to much taxation and got most of its revenue from import and export tariffs.

    They had had to pass an emergency, temporary income tax during the war to have any money to fight with, because the South had been the main source of their cash earning exports.

    Then, the US freed all slaves in areas then controlled by the Confederacy. Then, they sent General Sherman to wreck much of the South. So, the South would definitely lose its slaves if it lost the war, and it would be desperately in need of funds to rebuild.

    Perhaps the US government even aided and abetted them. Suppose some experienced US judge appointed by the US president and Congress went around secretly in the South in the last months of the war. Suppose any plantation owner who recited the Pledge Of Allegiance with what the US judge felt was sincerity, got to export their slaves at a prearranged time and place which was free of interference. The plantation owners were not required to rise up against the South, only to save the funds for reconstruction. This scenario is possible but not necessary. The South was guaranteed to have to give up their slaves if they lost, and was in need of rebuilding funds because of Sherman's march.

    After the war, or perhaps even during the last stages of the war, they may have started importing free blacks to work in the South and continue to keep it the source of the nation's trade surplus.

    They had the same thing they would have had if they had just freed the slaves: Free men who you have to pay, but who maybe aren't powerful enough to insist on the same wages and treatment as whites.

    Except they had the financial windfall of the actual slaves' sale. They also had people who, for a few generations at least, remembered that they could have things a lot worse, such as the colonial oppression, disease, and food insecurity of Africa or the lack of opportunities of the English Caribbean.

    The free blacks may have come from Liberia or some oppressive foreign colony. Maybe they had secretly hired Liberians to coach them to speak like Americans. Or maybe the government aided and abetted the process by keeping them segregated.
     
    #6 garage sale GT, Jun 22, 2020
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2020
  6. garage sale GT

    garage sale GT New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    1,658
    Likes Received:
    3
    I do hope they put George Floyd's policemen in jail.

    Unless something we haven't been told comes up to exonerate them, but I can't see what that would be.

    I just question part of the historical narrative because it would make so much sense for the South to do what I think they may have done.
     
  7. garage sale GT

    garage sale GT New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    1,658
    Likes Received:
    3
    I just realized what makes it all work.

    If the slaves had been sold off, you'd think there wouldn't be so many former slaves here.

    But if the big planters found volunteers to replace the sold ex-slaves, no one would be the wiser.

    They could let the few remaining authentic ex-slaves do the talking until the rest learned to speak like Americans.

    The war was very expensive. The Federal Government or the slavers' own states would probably have wanted to tax or fine the former large slaveholders heavily and their own people might have robbed them or burned them out if everyone knew they were sitting on a great deal of gold because they had been impoverished by the war.
     
  8. garage sale GT

    garage sale GT New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2006
    Messages:
    1,658
    Likes Received:
    3
    I just realized what makes it all work.

    If the slaves had been sold off, you'd think there wouldn't be so many here.

    But if the big planters found volunteers to replace the sold ex-slaves, no one would be the wiser.

    They could let the few remaining authentic ex-slaves do the talking until the rest learned to speak like Americans.

    The war was very expensive. The Federal Government or their own states would probably have wanted to tax or fine the former large slaveholders heavily and their own people might have robbed them or burned them out if everyone knew they were sitting on a great deal of gold.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads - Reparations slavery
  1. lyotard
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    1,830
Loading...