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

I addressed you twice but you ignored all the facts.
Fact is the south had resources the north wanted and so they took it. it is good slavery was abolished as an added benefit.
But you have to also look at what blacks have done with that freedom, by listening to the same ones who helped enslave them.
Now they are on a more deadly plantation of their own making ,the welfare ghetto one. Killing each other, drugging each other and destroying their family's.

 

Man alive. You know next to nothing about history of that era, it appears. The fact of the value of the collective slaves in the south being in the near 4 billions is not in question. Historians agree and the Southerns themselves in their declarations boasted of it.

There were few private slave owners? Yow. If you think approaching near a half million slaveowners in a population of about 1 1/4 million free white men is "few.." then well, I suggest you spend some time cracking some books.

And the vast majority of slaves were not owned by large plantations. That is a MYTH. Less than 10% were large plantations.
Many in the south owned one or a few slaves, majority less than 5, and banks / mortgage companies were more than happy to loan cash to purchase a slave, so even the much less well-to-do could own one.

Like buying a car, if you were deemed reputable, here ya go Massa, won't cost ya nothing up front -- just pay it off slowly, but we hold the deed on your slave.

 

One of the saddest maps one may ever see:

 

also notice which states instituted jim crow after the the south was whipped

 

Anyone who believes this fake map is as lost in lies as you are.

And 4 billion, what a damn joke there wasn't even 4 billion in the whole damn nation back then. Not but 350 million in the nation today.
Keep skinning your ignorance and prove just how clueless you really are.

 

To follow up on my #107 -- From an earlier post of mine:

Slaves were much cheaper in the 1820 - 40's (it spiked midway corresponding with the 1837 crash, then went back down again.) -- these slaves did what? They reproduced (literally "breeding" them), they were handed down to families, and yes, the means to obtain one was not something out of reach for an average middlin' southerner, and the financiers did what?

Yep, you could mortgage a slave, quite readily. Many did. There were huge banking outfits all set to help you obtain a slave, just like people will help you obtain a car today. It paid off well.

Let's have a look:
"In the 1830s, powerful Southern slaveowners wanted to import capital into their states so they could buy more slaves. They came up with a new, two-part idea: mortgaging slaves; and then turning the mortgages into bonds that could be marketed all over the world.

First, American planters organized new banks, usually in new states like Mississippi and Louisiana.

Drawing up lists of slaves for collateral, the planters then mortgaged them to the banks they had created, enabling themselves to buy additional slaves to expand cotton production. To provide capital for those loans, the banks sold bonds to investors from around the globe — London, New York, Amsterdam, Paris. The bond buyers, many of whom lived in countries where slavery was illegal, didn’t own individual slaves — just bonds backed by their value. Planters’ mortgage payments paid the interest and the principle on these bond payments. Enslaved human beings had been, in modern financial lingo, “securitized.”

As slave-backed mortgages became paper bonds, everybody profited — except, obviously, enslaved..."
American finance grew on the back of slaves

Another article on it:
"Data collected from mortgages in the public records of Virginia, South Carolina, and Louisiana shows that, with the reassurance of slave mortgages, neighbor borrowed from neighbor and friends endorsed the debt contracts of friends. As a result, those buying slaves were able to expand their holdings in slaves more quickly because they did not have to save the entire purchase price before making their acquisitions.

For sellers, credit sales using mortgages expanded the pool of potential buyers, whether those sellers were the factors of international firms, large planters, small farmers, or artisans. Southerners who owned slaves outright and who wanted to retain their workforce used human collateral to convince merchants to make cash advances and to sell supplies on credit."

Academic journal article The Journal of Southern History
Slavery's Invisible Engine: Mortgaging Human Property

 

LOL. You certainly are one piece of work.

The map is not "fake" -- those are from 1860 census numbers - and I never said there were 4 billion people in the south. Good freakin lord.

I said the value of the collective slaves in the south was near 4 billion.

PAY ATTENTION!

 

Heal thyself.

 

The point was confederacy worse than nazi cuz spreading slavery.

Nazi would have enslaved the planet (including blacks), which is worse than just enslaving blacks.

So if we're gonna shift the goal posts around, we have to at least do it equally. Nazi still worse than confederacy in intent.

 

The one shifting the goal posts is you. *I* never made that argument regarding the Nazi's & the CSA. Take it up with the person who did.

I was correcting errors I saw being tossed around regarding the Civil War.

With hopes you learned something here about it.

 

Considering all your other false accusations it is understandable that I miss read your rants about numbers since you have no knowledge whatsoever about history.
Your maps are probably written by what I consider and my opinion of is ACLU,NAACP,CAIR, SPLC, LaRaza,ADL or some other communist type agenda pushers.

 

1. You've yet to point out one false accusation. You toss out Lost Cause garbage like gumballs. The one about there being "just a few" slaveowners in the south was a gem. lol
2. I've made my living in history for over 3 decades now, with an emphasis on the Civil War -- and the guy / gal who doesn't even know the 1860 census count, as shown in map form of the slavocracy (I even posted the raw numbers from the census less than an hour ago)

--is trying to tell me *I* "have no knowledge whatsoever about history" lol
and the map shown was created by "ACLU,NAACP,CAIR, SPLC, LaRaza,ADL or some other communist type agenda pushers."



I've give you this, Guess: you provide good entertainment.

 

its really cool that you don't feel weird about openly admitting to your nazi sympathies

 

You prefer African and Islamic future majorities in Europe, the destruction of European cultures and Muslim rape gangs all throughout the continent.

That is something you have to answer for, not me.

 

I'll go him one better. The only one I know of between the end of the confederacy and 1990 ever convicted of raping a black woman was Mike Tyson. Make of it what you will.

 

thats a cool way to sidestep from being a nazi sympathizer when its pointed out

 

You're an open communist. No one cares what you think.

 

Since when do you speak for everybody?

LOL

 

Actually, Paperview is quite right.

 

You're siding with a proud communist. Got it.

 

No, that it untrue. I have no idea who is a communist and who is not, but the way you speak, you sound much more like a fascist to me, because guilt by association is most definitely a fascist trait. Are you a fascist?

 

.

 

To communists random center right people are Fascists.

Dead giveaway.

 

what an interesting diversion from you being a secret nazi

 

Oh, I'm a communist alright. For some reason people who openly ask if the "official narrative" about the holocaust is true and who openly praise nazi germany (but who get VERY upset when you suggest that this is grounds to conclude that they're nazis) think that wanting the way capital is allocated to change is somehow inherently morally corrupt, let alone even close to their ties to ideologies that promote the extermination of millions.