Was the confederacy of the U.S. worse than the Nazis?

What you have provided is perhaps evidence of bad people existing, but not that blm is inherently responsible for their actions. By your definition republicans are definitively violent and racist. By your description the police are inherently violent and racist. We can easily make a laundry list of horrors and bad things done by both of those organizations. For that matter if we are blaming organizations for the actions of their members almost every organization is problematic under your broad net. So once you cast that net that broadly the net itself is so inclusive as to be useless. So you have proven people do bad things, and some use organizations to do so, but you have not proven that any organization including blm is inherently violent or problematic.

But thanks for the effort, it is just a lot of wheel spinning that is not proving your point.

 

It is nice and all, but if you are under the impression white slave owners did not kill their slaves you have been either lied to, or you have drawn the wrong conclusion and need to go back to that class and learn some facts. Yes, they killed slaves all the time. They carelessly dragged them over to America and lost a lot of their profit from disease and death along transport. Also many slaves were killed as an example of what happens from disobedience. At a certain point it would also be more expensive to feed an injured or elderly slave than to allow them to live, so you kill them. These are all just realities s of the slave trade.

This wasn't club med for the slaves. Their lives were hard and exploited. They did not just go along with this because the white man asked them. Not that relationship was made with harsh and brutal treatment and definitely involved some killing. Perhaps the lucky ones were exterminated as the ones who survived the brutality were horribly abused and dehumanized. This was not some pleasant working environment. If it was at any time working smoothly it was under the threat of very real brutality and horror. There is nothing noble or nice about keeping slaves. Those people were not there out of choice or for their own good. That idea is perverse and so false I cannot believe a rational person cannot see how much of a lie it is.

The amount of abuse and terror I would have to do to you to enslave you and keep you in line would be sadistic and monstrous. That brutality and evil was what the confederacy stood for and justified. Hitler killed Jews and had them stuff their own people in ovens along with allowing brutal experimentation and exploitation of their people. It was horrible and disgusting in every way, but he killed them. He did not decide to brutalized them and sell them as property in a system where constant abuse and horrible oppression was required to keep control of a group of people who death might have been an escape and release. The ones who were lucky got a nice kill. If you ****ed around you were abused and whipped before all the other slaves. Your bones were broken and your flesh was ripped from you by the leather of a whip. You were starved and beaten. You were punished and treated as animals. Some were killed but most were brutalized to the point where it was easier to work yourself to death in deplorable conditions than to face the consequences of defying the confederacy.

The lucky ones were killed. The fact you are not disgusted by slavery and the treatment of the slaves says a lot about your morality and personality. Whether you are hiding from the brutal horror of the truth, or justifying that sick and perverse institution you are demonstrating some pretty big character flaws. Maybe you are cool with being a racist sadist who feels the brutalization of people was a necessity of this world, but do not fault me for not seeing that as good or noble, and do not pretend your beliefs are different.

 

Slaves were intrinsically more useful and profitable to the South than were Jews to the Third Reich, yes.

Slaves in the American South were treated more humanely on general than slaves in the Caribbean and portions of South America were the conditions were such that the slaves needed to be replaced every seven years.

Slaves in the American South were able to survive, breed, and leave posterity.

None of this means that American slaves "as an imported labor force" was in any way humane.

 

No they didn't exterminate or murder slaves "all the time" their slaves were an investment, an asset, valuable property. Yes slavery was an ugly and sometimes brutal institution of the UNITED STATES established here by Europeans. But to equate the Confederacy to Nazi Germany is absurd and uneducated.

And keep it on an intellectual level instead of turning to specious personal attacks.

 

They came AFTER the war. The North wanted their cheap cotton and tobacco and other slave based commerece. Again the Civil War was fought to keep the Union intact WITH slavery still in practice including the slavery in the Northern slave states that did not secede.

 

If yiu can't handle your position being challenged why are you here?
So again what is the distinction you are attempting to make between slavery on the United States and the Confederacy. Your claim that the United States wasn't founded with slavery is totally false.

 

Would it be against political correctness to explain to you how sick it is to compare confederate soldiers to Nazi's who gassed millions of jews?

 

Your conclusion does not mesh with the actual historical facts, Bluesguy. The reason slavery was permitted to exist elsewhere in the Union was to keep those areas in hand while the Union was being preserved. If your trope was correct, there would not have been continual efforts to end slavery during the War.

paperview is perhaps the best CW historian in the blogosphere. Consult her for further info and evidence.

 

I see, so you don't like to hold people responsible when you agree with them

 

They did not kill slaves as casually as the Nazis killed Jews, but their attitude towards them was the same. It was just that the confederacy saw the slaves as a workhorse. They still felt breeding with a black slave was like breeding with a Jew for the Nazis. The Nazis may have actually had more respect for the Jews as humans because blacks were more like livestock. Mating with a black was like mating with an animal where mating with a new was was still mating with a human.

In that way the confederacy was worse. News were a threat that needed to be slaughtered. Blacks were seen as so sub human that they could be domesticated. That is a sick viewpoint. That viewpoint is very common in the declarations and writings of the American slave owner.

Also one should not slavery was different for black people than for other people's. This is because blacks were viewed as sub human like the Nazis viewed the Jews as sub human. To commit the atrocities on those people not was necessary to make them non human. If that is a bad thing it is clear the confederacy was far worse in how they viewed blacks than the Nazis were in viewing the Jews.

 

It is the worst form of political correctness to classify the comparison as sick. You are asking me to not offend you with my ideas and that is being politically correct. So don't complain about the very thing you are using to try and tell me to shut up without any discussion from you.

 

If I were to hold everyone to such standards I would most certainly have nothing to do with the alt right, conservative, and republican movements. So I do not have standards that say if someone in your organization does something violent I am going to define your whole movement as violent and wrong. If those are your standards I will expect you to hold true to them and denounce the right wing with the same vitriol as they also have people doing horrible violent stuff in their name.

I prefer to be a bit more discerning than that. When I do that I find that blm is not a violent organization or movement.

 

Advocating violence and getting it is fine though? And let me guess, they have responsibility to denounce such violence.

 

I think you confuse political correctness with politeness. Your post didn't offend me. It was just wrong.

 

Tererun, actually, was quite correct, fmw.

 

Political correctness is just manners which is being polite. You may not want to be polite, or politically correct, but that is all it is.

 

Just goes to show you how bad I am at political correctness. Opinions, by the way are neither wrong nor right. They are just opinions.

 

Nonsense.
Hitler and the Nazis directly caused tens of millions of deaths over the span of 6 years of open, total warfare, as well as the virtual destruction of almost an entire continent.
Any attempt to compare the two reeks of abject ignorance.

 

That is an incorrect opinion. Hitler was wrong when he opined all the Jews should be killed. Opinions are not moral neutral.

 

I didn't say they are "moral neutral." I said they are opinions not facts. Facts can be right or wrong. Not opinions.

 

What you said, fmw, was "Opinions, by the way are neither wrong nor right. They are just opinions." They are not moral neutral.