Meme Thread for Both Posting and Discussing Memes
- Thread starter Captain X
- Start date
bintananth
behind a desk
Even the Confederates thought the internatonal slave trade wasn't OK and they wanted to preserve a "peculiar institution" the Yankees of the day weren't really all that interested in getting rid of.
Bassoe
Well-known member
That was more likely economically rather than ethically motivated. They already had slaves, and said slaves could, if given time, produce more slaves. If there were new sources of slaves coming into the country, their monopoly on selling the children of their slaves would be threatened and more plantation owner megafarms could be founded to economically compete with them.
The default reaction of a sociopathic successful businessman is to preemptively sabotage any rivals.
Simonbob
Well-known member
I don't know enough to say for sure, although that was likely an aspect.
It could also have to do with the numbers who died along the way. It wasn't a safe trip, not at all.
Typhonis
Well-known member
20221124edsuc-a.tif - Tribune Content Agency (November 23, 2022)
SUMMERS; MADOFF; FTX; CRYPTOCURRENCY; BANKRUPTCY; SCAM
tribunecontentagency.com
DarthOne
☦️
Quite a few of them still are.
And yet you will never see the activist crowd go after them for it. Because quite clearly slavery that was done away with a 150 years ago is much more important then people being enslaved right now.
Historical records don't really work to this idea.
The first English speaking government to outlaw the Atlantic Slave Trade was the Colony of Virginia in 1777. Since this was a STATE law and not one on a... umm... well, "national" isn't the right term yet SINCE VIRGINIA PASSED THIS LAW WHILE THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR WAS BEING FOUGHT, anyway, since this only limited the importation of slaves to Virginia, but not other slavery allowing states, that arguably means that they were DISADVANTAGING themselves compared to other slave states, but did it ANYWAY. Which speaks to them simply disliking the trade period, not some evil economic motice.
Further, the formal US abolition of the Slave Trade took place literally as soon as it was Constitutionally allowed to happen. One of the major pushers of this was then-President Thomas Jefferson, who explicitly called for the abolition of the slave trade under the ideals of human rights and morality. Further, later developments in the 1800s indicate that those invested in slavery economically disliked the ban, as it drove up the cost of slaves, to the point some tried to push to reallow the slave trade.
So yeah, try again with the demonization of the Founders and Framers... that dog won't hunt.
bintananth
behind a desk
The only reason the importation of slaves wasn't outright banned by the US Constitution in 1789 is because the majority of the delegates from each of the 13 states had to be in complete and unanimous agreement. "We'll wait 20yrs and re-examine this" was the compromise.
Bigking321
Well-known member
Didn't that lose by like 1 vote?
Skallagrim
Well-known member
That was Jefferson's 1784 proposal to ban slavery from all territories & new states forever. Had it been adopted, slavery would not just have been banned in the North-West Territory, but also in what would become Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee, and thereafter in all future states.
This would have ultimately restricted slavery to just six states (Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia).
Worst thing is that it was defeated by one vote because one representative happened to be absent. Dixit Jefferson: "The voice of a single individual of the state which was divided, or of one of those which were of the negative, would have prevented this abominable crime from spreading itself over the new country. Thus we see the fate of millions unborn hanging on the tongue of one man, & heaven was silent in that awful moment!"
Last edited:
Skitzyfrenic
Well-known member
Man, the Chinese must think we are either monstrous af or the coolest people ever.
Skallagrim
Well-known member
They're really trying to play up the notion of "brave little underdog China versus powerful Evil Empire of Darkness USA". And they really, really suck at it.
In a certain sense, America does the same thing. In almost every action film, the American heroes are somehow put into a situation where they're the underdogs with no back-up, and the enemy is numerically far superior (usually better-armed, too). In reality, America is never the underdog in any conflict on Earth.
Difference is, America is pretty good at this propaganda game, and China is comically bad at it.
Look at thier Korean War propaganda movie. Makes us look even more badassThey're really trying to play up the notion of "brave little underdog China versus powerful Evil Empire of Darkness USA". And they really, really suck at it.
In a certain sense, America does the same thing. In almost every action film, the American heroes are somehow put into a situation where they're the underdogs with no back-up, and the enemy is numerically far superior (usually better-armed, too). In reality, America is never the underdog in any conflict on Earth.
Difference is, America is pretty good at this propaganda game, and China is comically bad at it.
Now now, in fairness, they at least manage to make a decent looking underdog. Every other poster they make just shows small little boys getting their asses kicked, lmao.They're really trying to play up the notion of "brave little underdog China versus powerful Evil Empire of Darkness USA". And they really, really suck at it.
In a certain sense, America does the same thing. In almost every action film, the American heroes are somehow put into a situation where they're the underdogs with no back-up, and the enemy is numerically far superior (usually better-armed, too). In reality, America is never the underdog in any conflict on Earth.
Difference is, America is pretty good at this propaganda game, and China is comically bad at it.
Modern conflict.
We had our share of underdog conflicts. The American Revolution and War of 1812 both certainly qualify as America being the underdog. You also see people reading the American Civil War that way given how badly the US did in 61/62, though in reality the Confederacy was always the underdog who got lucky. Other than those historical examples, yeah, the US has never truly been the underdog in a conflict, rather, we tend to be stupid and fight with both hands tied behind our back due to politicians and optics.
PsihoKekec
Swashbuckling Accountant
1812 only partially qualifies, as the Brits were kind of preoccupied in Europe throughout most of the war.
bintananth
behind a desk
That and the British admiralty was also basically screaming "don't pick another fight with the US" at Parliament because they knew that it took a ship-of-the line and/or several frigates just to contain one American warship which might decide to randomly raid a port on the East coast of Great Britain ... again.