BF2S Forums Happy 150th anniversary of the American Civil War

Slavery would have become untenable anyway. Imagine the costs required to provide food and accomodation for a group of slaves in America in the modern day, let alone transporting them. Even at a low standard it would be unrealistic. That's why work is outsourced to other countries now where people can be used to work for incredibly low wages due to low living costs in particular countries. Added bonus is you don't need to worry about worker's health or work conditions because it doesn't mean any downturn in production. It's worse than slavery in many ways but since it's not called slavery we all seem okay with it.

Ty wrote:

Slavery would have become untenable anyway. Imagine the costs required to provide food and accomodation for a group of slaves in America in the modern day, let alone transporting them. Even at a low standard it would be unrealistic. That's why work is outsourced to other countries now where people can be used to work for incredibly low wages due to low living costs in particular countries. Added bonus is you don't need to worry about worker's health or work conditions because it doesn't mean any downturn in production. It's worse than slavery in many ways but since it's not called slavery we all seem okay with it.

The reason a lot of us are OK with it is because of the unfortunate fact that without said work they'd be even worse off. This of course assumes that they are not forcibly pressed into work, at which point it isn't OK.

lowing wrote:

As I said earlier, the disenfranchised, in the north was no better off than the slaves in the south. Yeah you will argue but they were "free". Free do what? Free to leave, where? There was no social programs, or help up money, they lived and died by the work they produced, just like slaves.

The north was not apposed to slavery, they had a different idea of how it should be put to use.

Hey moron, this is the last time I say it. You can not compare slavery to the lot of factory workers in the north. Now kindly shut the fuck up with that line of reasoning. Thanks.

13rin wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

lowing wrote:

So you think the blacks that ran up north found the American dream huh? Problem solved just by running north and living happily ever after... ok, you go ahead and think that.

I am commenting on their ACTUAL working and living conditions and their quality of life. not the morality of slavery. See if you can get past that and comment on what I am saying.

Maybe you can find the figures on how many went back south and signed themselves back into slavery.

It was called sharecropping. See map.

blacks were actually worst off in sharecropping afaik.

Dilbert_X wrote:

So freedom+capitalism is worse than slavery?

Maybe lowing has a point after all.

nice troll lol

Jay wrote:

lowing wrote:

As I said earlier, the disenfranchised, in the north was no better off than the slaves in the south. Yeah you will argue but they were "free". Free do what? Free to leave, where? There was no social programs, or help up money, they lived and died by the work they produced, just like slaves.

The north was not apposed to slavery, they had a different idea of how it should be put to use.

Hey moron, this is the last time I say it. You can not compare slavery to the lot of factory workers in the north. Now kindly shut the fuck up with that line of reasoning. Thanks.

As I said before I am not speaking of the the social status differences between free and slave. I am speaking of quality of life, hardships, abuses and inability to actually have choices. The factory workers, were abused, disenfranchised and disposable. There are comparisons to be made, regardless of your name calling and demands. The internet has a lot of articles on the topic if you do some searching.

lowing wrote:

So you think the blacks that ran up north found the American dream huh? Problem solved just by running north and living happily ever after... ok, you go ahead and think that.

I am commenting on their ACTUAL working and living conditions and their quality of life. not the morality of slavery. See if you can get past that and comment on what I am saying.

you seem to be continually ignoring or discounting the psychological and emotional difficulties that come with being a piece of property.

so lowing is pro-union?  it sure seems like it.

Reciprocity wrote:

lowing wrote:

So you think the blacks that ran up north found the American dream huh? Problem solved just by running north and living happily ever after... ok, you go ahead and think that.

I am commenting on their ACTUAL working and living conditions and their quality of life. not the morality of slavery. See if you can get past that and comment on what I am saying.

you seem to be continually ignoring or discounting the psychological and emotional difficulties that come with being a piece of property.

very good, that is exactly what I did, I am addressing living conditions, lack of real choice, quality of life, hardships were comparable. I am not addressing social standing.

lowing wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

lowing wrote:

So you think the blacks that ran up north found the American dream huh? Problem solved just by running north and living happily ever after... ok, you go ahead and think that.

I am commenting on their ACTUAL working and living conditions and their quality of life. not the morality of slavery. See if you can get past that and comment on what I am saying.

you seem to be continually ignoring or discounting the psychological and emotional difficulties that come with being a piece of property.

very good, that is exactly what I did, I am addressing living conditions, lack of real choice, quality of life, hardships were comparable. I am not addressing social standing.

lol, you are fucking dense.  what the fuck does social standing have to do with the psychological effects of being an owned object?  that's like saying being in prison is actually better than living in a college dorm as long as you ignore the whole "being in prison" part.

lowing wrote:

Do you see now what I am saying?

no.   your argument is pointless and inane. 

using your analogy I am saying being in prison might be better than being homeless on the street.

actually, no.  that's not what you're saying.

Dilbert_X wrote:

No really, I think he is leaning towards socialism.

lowing wrote:

There was no social programs, or help up money, they lived and died by the work they produced, just like slaves.

There we go, I  think we convinced him.

Just shows once again how we end up with fiscal retards like Bush as president. Social conservatards are so fixated on putting blacky in his place, forcing the butt pirates to be normal, banning abortion, etc that they would vote for any nation-bankrupting bill as long as it gave them the promise of maybe one day fulfilling one of those goals. They're so full of hate that it blinds them.

lowing says he's a libertarian on the issues, that he doesn't agree with banning behaviors he doesn't agree with, but I guarantee that if he was in the voting booth where he could cast his ballot anonymously, and the choice was presented to him, he'd go down the line banning everything and then proclaim to the world how he upheld freedom. It's also hilarious that he takes up the causes and positions of the fundamentalist Christians in this country while claiming to be an atheist.

Jay wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

No really, I think he is leaning towards socialism.

lowing wrote:

There was no social programs, or help up money, they lived and died by the work they produced, just like slaves.

There we go, I  think we convinced him.

Just shows once again how we end up with fiscal retards like Bush as president. Social conservatards are so fixated on putting blacky in his place, forcing the butt pirates to be normal, banning abortion, etc that they would vote for any nation-bankrupting bill as long as it gave them the promise of maybe one day fulfilling one of those goals. They're so full of hate that it blinds them.

lowing says he's a libertarian on the issues, that he doesn't agree with banning behaviors he doesn't agree with, but I guarantee that if he was in the voting booth where he could cast his ballot anonymously, and the choice was presented to him, he'd go down the line banning everything and then proclaim to the world how he upheld freedom. It's also hilarious that he takes up the causes and positions of the fundamentalist Christians in this country while claiming to be an atheist.

Not sure where any of that is coming from, since I have never made any comments regarding "blacky" being put in his place, or anti-gay comments, or banning abortion.


I am a libertarian on many issues, and your "guarantee" is not worth a damn since I honestly believe in everything I post an opinion on. Why would I lie? I am not out to suck for karma points like you have done. I genuinely want to discuss the issues that interest me. If you need reasoning to show I believe in freedom I can convince you. Take drugs, I think drugs should be legal for one reason. Because I don't give 2 flying fucks if you choose to shoot that shit in your arm or inhale it into your lungs. I say, take a deep drag and hold it in. THe longer the better. Get a bigger needle and shoot that shit deep in your arm just like you like. Because the sooner your dumb ass is gone, the sooner the rest of society can close ranks and move on in a world with one less crack whore in it.

As far as religion goes, I am not an atheist, I consider my self to be agnostic. I have no idea what happens when I die, I just don't think there is anyone on earth qualified to tell me. Also, you do not need religion to have a sense of morality. The golden rule does just fine.

anyway, I hope that clears it up