-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Pete Buttigieg: "The people who wrote the Constitution did not understand slavery was a bad thing."
- Thread starter PMS341
- Start date
That's a really interesting point, law at the time actually prevented him from freeing a lot of his slavers because they were married to Martha's slaves. His heirs also were against them being freed. We can't really know what family or legal pressure was being applied.
It's also not surprising to hear from a candidate who sees black voters as stepping stones--or obstacles.
Just some random food for thought things.
Council of Koblenz, 922. - 810 years before George Washington was born
Council of London, 1102. - 630 years before George Washington was born
New Laws of the Indies for the Good Treatment and Preservation of the Indians (1532) - 200 years before George Washington was born
In Defense of the Indians (1548) by Bartolomé de las Casas - 184 years before George Washington was born
History of the Indies (1561) by Bartolomé de las Casas - 171 years before George Washington was born
Council of Koblenz, 922. - 810 years before George Washington was born
Council of London, 1102. - 630 years before George Washington was born
New Laws of the Indies for the Good Treatment and Preservation of the Indians (1532) - 200 years before George Washington was born
http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/servlet/SirveObras/06922752100647273089079/p0000026.htm (Google translate)
In Defense of the Indians (1548) by Bartolomé de las Casas - 184 years before George Washington was born
History of the Indies (1561) by Bartolomé de las Casas - 171 years before George Washington was born
You do know once they exhausted the supply of native labor (between disease and conditions) they went ahead imported enslaved Africans right? The Crown in Spain absolutely had their own selfish reasons for passing these laws, including tightening control over the colonies, not enslaving them in order to turn them into good Catholics (genocide), and ensure the labor supply didn't die off.
Right, and the colonists also killed the viceroy who was meant to employ the law stopping slavery of the Native Indians in the first place. I'm not trying to present Spain as good and the US as evil.
What I'm trying to point out is that no one was ignorant of what they were doing even before the founding fathers of the USA; slavery wasn't a whoopsie or a holdover from a more foolish age. There were people who wanted slavery because they gained from it, and they fought against the efforts to stop or curb slavery.
Not exactly that law prevented that (slave marriage was no consideration legally and rarely considered by slaveowners) he was reluctant to free those he owned personally without attaining the freedom of the slaves' family, many of whom were owned by Martha's family and heirs. He either never got the money to do so, or couldn't convince them to free them. Robert Carter basically willed his remaining slaves to a attorney who continued the long-term manumission and administration of the estate, and incurred a lawsuit by his heirs against the attorney to regain ownership.
Indeed.
I don't know how one could honestly believe that except out of extreme and complete willful ignorance, which can't be applied here given his education. The writings of the founding fathers are so prevalent in US history education that you can't avoid being exposed to them at some point, especially as a history major. They knew it was wrong and wrote about how it was wrong. Even if he didn't study US history (which there's no way he didn't study it at all given he's from here), people knew it was wrong throughout the colonial period and before.
That's an intentional whitewashing.
That's an intentional whitewashing.
Expecting someone who majored in history at Harvard to know about the realities of transatlantic slave trade?
Smh more purity tests
Lmao people will give White folks a pass for anything. 50 year old Biden was too young to know that segregation was wrong, 18 yr old Hillary who campaigned for a segregationist didn't know it was wrong and in 2014 Mayor Pete is still a perpetually innocent White kid that gets the benefit of the doubt for this nonsense.
"Reports are just in that Buttigieg's support among black voters has jumped to a record-breaking 65535%."
I highly, highly doubt anyone has seriously said gay people can't be racist but if you can prove me wrong I'd love (well, wouldn't love but you know) to see it.
Coming late to the thread, obviously he is grossly wrong--they fully knew it was evil, they didn't care in various ways--but I refuse to believe a historian could sincerely be this wrong. This was a big issue for the Founders and they discussed it extensively. If you know anything about the period at all, you know that.
This is why Buttigieg really worries me and I may even prefer Biden to him, and I greatly dislike Biden. He is deliberately lying due to his personal ambition. He has no principles. This guy is dangerous.
This is why Buttigieg really worries me and I may even prefer Biden to him, and I greatly dislike Biden. He is deliberately lying due to his personal ambition. He has no principles. This guy is dangerous.
Last edited:
Slave owners were so aware what they were doing was evil and inhumane, that their ministers invented the myth of black people being the cursed offspring of Caanan in order to "justify" the african slave trade from a religious perspective. This is relevant to this conversation, because Pete also identifies as a christian. And this is an enormous part of the legacy of christianity in this country.
Ok, for fucks sake. Enough is enough. Can we please just throw Butti in the trash already and be done with it. I mean how many chances can this guy get? People threw Beto to the side and called him the most centre-right dem nominee for far less than Butti has shown. if it wasn't clear before, it should be clear by now. I dont care how well he speaks, Butti is trash. He is not progressive. He is not for the people.
That's an excellent point. If you're a white Christian in this country, particularly a white Christian with a decent education in American history, you ought to make yourself aware of how dominant religious movements in this country were birthed and nurtured precisely to provide a scrap of moral cover for slavery, genocide of native people, and white imperialism.
Weren't most of the slaves at the estate owned by the Marthas estate (Custis family).. meaning he legally didn't own them so he couldn't free them.
I take solace in the fact that there's no way in hell this guy is getting the nom. Hopefully the next viable queer candidate someday will have a better head on their shoulders.
God damn you, I had the GIF all loaded up and ready to go, lol
I don't believe this is true.
Washington stipulated in his will that most of Martha and his slaves were not to be released until her Martha's death.
Even though he knew it was wrong, he did not want to inconvenience or make a real sacrifice for himself or his living heirs.
I have a hard time squaring that with your description of Washington having a strong character in that regard.
He stipulated that his slaves that were married to Martha's slaves were to be released together so the families weren't broken up.
That caused some problems because Martha's slaves were owned by her and her family, and Washington didn't have the right to free them.
True, but Pete has been prepping for this run since at least middle school.
Let's not wax poetic about good old George. He was raping Black women and girls. Is this a "he rapes but he saves" thing?
Remember when the entire news media and some Libs got angry when a Black dude called Pete a Lyin' Motherfucker?? Lmao
I've been looking for a source for the GW rapes as you stated but I haven't been able to find one. Multiple sources have reported that there was never any register of that happening. Do you have a source?
and
" It was never recorded that George Washington sexually abused any of his slaves, but Betty was still vulnerable to exploitation by other men at Mount Vernon, as well as at the White House plantation. " Source 22
There's nothing to expand on. Slaveowners were rapists and sex traffickers.
Rape wasn't reported, so it didn't happen? This is the argument we're making in 2020?
If they didn't know it was bad then why didn't they become slaves? Surely one of these people would have tried it out.
There is no register of Trump working with the Russians to hack and steal the election either.
There is no register of Trump working with the Russians to hack and steal the election either.
Umm, no one is making that argument, but there doesn't seem to be any evidence at all that Washington raped his slaves...which is what your sources say.
When you post things as facts I would think you would have a source on it. If you'd like to attack me instead, that's your prerogative. It's a big statement you made.
But there is?
Cause it is. Poor struggling white man. Wants to do right but gee, owning people as property is wrong? golly...just didn't know.... If only we were writing some document about freedom from oppression...
I get what you're saying but to me American slavery and rape go hand in hand. Not only overseers taking advantage (which was common), not only massa himself. But if you make two people who have no legal rights copulate just so you can have more bigger and stronger slaves that's rape. If you provide "incentives" to enslaved people to breed in a vacuum without any legal rights...that's profound sexual abuse/exploitation akin to rape.
The shit occur on a scale so vast I'll never buy the notion that slave owners were somehow morally neutral. Or the nonsensical narrative of the reluctant slave owner. A lot of foul shit was par for the course w/ chattel slavery. So of all the times I'd give the benefit of the doubt a slave owner won't be it. I hope every single slave owner including Washington is roasting in 100% hellfire.
I been saying it: Can put a man on the moon but can't figure out being racist is wrong...
Last edited:
I'm not attacking you. Look at the institution of slavery and the rampant, systematic sexual violence that went hand in hand with it. You couldn't pay me to extend the benefit of the doubt to George Washington. A violent wealthy man that owned 200... rape really was not above his character. I'm sure there were slave brothels back then too.
I know evidence would be ideal but the crimes were centuries ago and rape is severely underreported to this day. There's no evidence for a lot of current sexual violence right now. I'm not giving any White slaveowner the benefit of the doubt screw that.
Shoot a slaveowner and a rapist bleeds. In my opinion, losing the right to rape Black people after doing so with impunity for 250 years is also part of the reason White society was very bitter about losing the institution of slavery.
I wish more stories and movies would be made about Washington's slaves that escaped (which he tried to bring back into servitude). Sure, he wasn't Tommy J or some of the other worst slavers, but he was still a slaver when he knew damn well it was evil.
Definitely is. Slavery and colonialism go hand in hand after all.
Definitely is. Slavery and colonialism go hand in hand after all.