Deranged Rhino Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 (edited) you said this: "in the antebellum south. Slaves were too valuable to purposefully harm. Didn't mean it didn't happen but they were outliers."Actually, that's not what I said nor is it in context. What I said was this: "And if you truly knew your history in this area you'd know those examples were not the norms, not even close to the norms, in the antebellum south. Slaves were too valuable to purposefully harm. Didn't mean it didn't happen but they were outliers." It's a different statement when you don't game the quote to try to get it to say what you want it to say. What I actually said is undoubtedly true. Extreme abuse was not the norm, the economics of Chattle slavery assured this far more than any laws. I never said abuses didn't happen. I never made the claim chattel slavery was morally justifiable, all I was pointing out were the abuses on the scale of what you mentioned (salt pepper, castration, etc) were not the norms -- not that they didn't happen. If you knew your history you'd know this is true. But you've already admitted you don't know this history, and you continue to demonstrate this beyond a shadow of a doubt throughout this discussion. It makes sense that you'd lash out with false claims against the guy who is making you look foolish in this thread. I get that your upset and embarrassed. It would be hard not to be with your posting history in this thread. You have been proven to be a complete hypocrite in this subject, and morally inferior. Your own logic after all is: anyone who supports slavery is morally inferior -- yet you gleefully support modern slavery because they make really neat iPhones and iPads. Still, it'd be appreciated if you were honest when trying to attack my position. Now, this final nugget: i believe a consensus of historians would judge your stance quite sympathetic to antebellum slaveholders and quite unsympathetic to slaves. it would most certainly be questioned during a thesis defense. but it's an historical point. and you stated you're an historian that published a thesis on the civil war. the reference to support your point should be easily plucked from your bibliography. go for it.[/background]This is exactly why you're getting your ass handed to you in this thread. Not only do you not understand the difference between a thesis and a doctoral dissertation, you're making the argument that anyone who dares offer facts that run contrary to your admittedly ignorant understanding of the subject (you yourself have admitted you have never studied this subject) they're being "unsympathetic to slaves". Think about that in relation to the greater topic at hand. To you, anyone who offers information that doesn't fit your shallow understanding of events, is instantly pro slavery. That's a recipe for whitewashing history if I've ever seen one. That's piss poor logic, it's an even scarier way to view/teach history. But it's hilarious reading all your righteous indignation about this when you refuse to own up to the fact that you, today right now, are enjoying the spoils of modern slavery. :lol: Edited December 29, 2015 by Deranged Rhino Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 (edited) Actually, that's not what I said nor is it in context. What I said was this: "And if you truly knew your history in this area you'd know those examples were not the norms, not even close to the norms, in the antebellum south. Slaves were too valuable to purposefully harm. Didn't mean it didn't happen but they were outliers." It's a different statement when you don't game the quote to try to get it to say what you want it to say. What I actually said is undoubtedly true. Extreme abuse was not the norm, the economics of Chattle slavery assured this far more than any laws. I never said abuses didn't happen. I never made the claim chattel slavery was morally justifiable, all I was pointing out were the abuses on the scale of what you mentioned (salt pepper, castration, etc) were not the norms -- not that they didn't happen. If you knew your history you'd know this is true. But you've already admitted you don't know this history, and you combine to demonstrate this beyond a shadow of a doubt throughout this discussion. It makes sense that you'd lash out with false claims against the guy who is making you look foolish in this thread. I get that your upset and embarrassed. It would be hard not to be with your posting history in this thread. You have been proven to be a complete hypocrite in this subject, and morally inferior. Your own logic after all is: anyone who supports slavery is morally inferior -- yet you gleefully support modern slavery because they make really neat iPhones and iPads. Still, it'd be appreciated if you were honest when trying to attack my position. Now, this final nugget: This is exactly why you're getting your ass handed to you in this thread. Not only do you not understand the difference between a thesis and a doctoral dissertation, you're making the argument that anyone who dares offer facts that run contrary to your admittedly ignorant understanding of the subject (you yourself have admitted you have never studied this subject) they're being "unsympathetic to slaves". Think about that in relation to the greater topic at hand. To you, anyone who offers information that doesn't fit your shallow understanding of events, is instantly pro slavery. That's a recipe for whitewashing history if I've ever seen one. That's piss poor logic, it's an even scarier way to view/teach history. But it's hilarious reading all your righteous indignation about this when you refuse to own up to the fact that you, today right now, are enjoying the spoils of modern slavery. :lol: fail to see the distinction between what I quoted and what you just recopied. care to explain? were slaves too valuable to purposely harm or not?. if so, produce some evidence. was cruelty to slaves and abuse an outlier event or not? how does context change the meaning of those statements (hint: it doesn't) . what did you mean by the word outliers? I believe I was the first to use it on this forum in reference to gladwell's book. I know what he meant. what did you mean? the rightful indignation is just that. you won't even confirm your documented use of words that have no alternative meanings. it's pitiful. oh, and in my circles, thesis means doctoral dissertation unless otherwise qualified. what was yours? a high school project? Edited December 29, 2015 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 fail to see the distinction between what I quoted and what you just recopied. care to explain? were slaves too valuable to purposely harm or not? Of course you fail to see the distinction. Your inability to see nuance is why you're getting your ass handed to you in this thread. "Anyone who supports slavery is morally inferior" -- that's what you said in this very thread is it not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Of course you fail to see the distinction. Your inability to see nuance is why you're getting your ass handed to you in this thread. "Anyone who supports slavery is morally inferior" -- that's what you said in this very thread is it not? you made the statements. were slaves too valuable to purposely harm or not? was slave cruelty an outlier event or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 you made the statements. were slaves too valuable to purposely harm or not? was slave cruelty an outlier event or not? I made the statement that extreme abuses were not the norm. And they were not. Now, back to the point and what you said: i'm not a civil war historian... i contend that those still supporting the idea of the confederacy and by extension its link to slavery, are in fact very likely to be ethically inferior to those that don't. So, using your own logic, is it not fair to say your support of Apple and its use of slave labor very likely makes you ethically inferior to those who do not support slavery? Do you care to comment at all on your own statements or would you like to continue to pretend you never said them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 oh, and in my circles, thesis means doctoral dissertation unless otherwise qualified. what was yours? a high school project? You need to move in smarter circles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 This thread is getting nasty and I thought I'd try to bring back to civility a little. Your mention of antebellum south reminded me that JP Losman joined a band after the Bills cut him. Here is one of their videos. He is playing the piano at :10 and a better picture at 1:22. Even if you don't like country you have to admit he is better at this than at QB Sadly i know the words to the entire song. it's not a bad song, i love the instrumental to some regard but the stereotypical watered down lyrics really bring that song down a peg. Hilary's voice is tremendous, pairs well with Charles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 I made the statement that extreme abuses were not the norm. And they were not. "Not the norm" and "outliers" are concepts that these black-and-white simpletons will never understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 (edited) I made the statement that extreme abuses were not the norm. And they were not. Now, back to the point and what you said: So, using your own logic, is it not fair to say your support of Apple and its use of slave labor very likely makes you ethically inferior to those who do not support slavery? Do you care to comment at all on your own statements or would you like to continue to pretend you never said them? you said nothing about extreme. once again, it's all documented right here. and your academic credentials here are important since you claim superiority of knowledge based on them. so what was your "thesis"? was it just an idea? did you obtain it from a box of crackerjacks? was it recognized by scholars as an important contribution to the field? were your "papers" published? or are you just blowing smoke? go ahead and lie because it's clear you believe you can get away with it. "Not the norm" and "outliers" are concepts that these black-and-white simpletons will never understand. except he didn't say "not the norm" until just now. and in the same vein, how bout your academic credentials here? or are they from the cliff claven school? Edited December 29, 2015 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Gators logic in this thread: Destroying history is good -- like ISIS does Slavery lifts people out of poverty. good grief you're a mess in the head. You're still not going to offer a response to my questions? Man, what an intellectual coward you are. I've never really had anything against you, but this has been a shameful performance in this thread. Pity. And if you truly knew your history in this area you'd know those examples were not the norms, not even close to the norms, in the antebellum south. Slaves were too valuable to purposefully harm. Didn't mean it didn't happen but they were outliers. you said nothing about extreme. once again, it's all documented right here. and your academic credentials here are important since you claim superiority of knowledge based on them. so what was your "thesis"? was it just an idea? did you obtain it from a box of crackerjacks? was it recognized by scholars as an important contribution to the field? were your "papers" published? or are you just blowing smoke? go ahead and lie because it's clear you believe you can get away with it. except he didn't say "not the norm" until just now. and in the same vein, how bout your academic credentials here? or are they from the cliff claven school? Just now, Christmas day, same thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Just now, Christmas day, same thing point conceded. doesn't change the argument nor the questions re evidence to support these contentions or academic credential to support claims of intellectual superiority on the matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 (edited) Sadly i know the words to the entire song. it's not a bad song, i love the instrumental to some regard but the stereotypical watered down lyrics really bring that song down a peg. Hilary's voice is tremendous, pairs well with Charles. I understand that you might not have liked JP when he was with the Bills but he does a nice job on the piano in that tune and you should give him some credit by name. A little known fact about that video is that the end part, where all of the band members are fixing to get laid, was filmed on the set for the other two but they green screened JP because one of his bud's filmed him picking up some broad on Chippewa and the director thought she was perfect for the video. The original plan was to have a computer on top of his piano and he was going to be Googling up some porn. Edited December 29, 2015 by 4merper4mer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 you said nothing about extreme. once again, it's all documented right here. Of course I did. But you missed when I said it because you were more interested in twisting the conversation away from your own hypocrisy towards something else. But you failed. So, back to the question you continue to ignore: So, using your own logic, is it not fair to say your support of Apple and its use of slave labor very likely makes you ethically inferior to those who do not support slavery? Do you care to comment at all on your own statements or would you like to continue to pretend you never said them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 29, 2015 Author Share Posted December 29, 2015 "Not the norm" and "outliers" are concepts that these black-and-white simpletons will never understand. No, they were the norm. What's next, you two idiots will start saying the Nazis were polite to the Jews as they gassed them? Clowns Never thought you would sink so low. What a pathetic idiot you are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 No, they were the norm. What's next, you two idiots will start saying the Nazis were polite to the Jews as they gassed them? Clowns Never thought you would sink so low. What a pathetic idiot you are :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 :lol: Yeah, nothing legitimizes a point of view like tossing out the Nazi card. He should change his screen name to 'Mr Godwin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 except he didn't say "not the norm" until just now. What the !@#$ do you think "outliers" means? and in the same vein, how bout your academic credentials here? or are they from the cliff claven school? I've read the classics. No, they were the norm. What's next, you two idiots will start saying the Nazis were polite to the Jews as they gassed them? Clowns Never thought you would sink so low. What a pathetic idiot you are Gassing Jews was not the norm, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Gassing Jews was not the norm, either. Now you've gone and ruined Joe the Sandusky Proponent's day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 29, 2015 Author Share Posted December 29, 2015 Yeah, nothing legitimizes a point of view like tossing out the Nazi card. He should change his screen name to 'Mr Godwin'. Oh, the Nazi thing upsets you. Wow The evidence legitimizes my point of view. You don't even have to know history--which obviously Tom and Greggy obviously do not--to understand you don't get people to work for free with brutality. Throw in laws which encourage brutality, put in charge people determined to squeeze every last once of profit from these people and you get institutionalized brutality. Why would people even argue that slavery wasn't incredibly brutal? I cannot imagine... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 29, 2015 Share Posted December 29, 2015 Oh, the Nazi thing upsets you. Wow The evidence legitimizes my point of view. You don't even have to know history--which obviously Tom and Greggy obviously do not--to understand you don't get people to work for free with brutality. Throw in laws which encourage brutality, put in charge people determined to squeeze every last once of profit from these people and you get institutionalized brutality. Why would people even argue that slavery wasn't incredibly brutal? I cannot imagine... Just what are you trying to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts