Merchants traded slaves just like they traded any sort of good. That's true for Jews, Greeks, overseas Chinese and every other group that traded in goods.
Now if you start blaming modern day Jews for that, then that's anti-semitic. However, if a Jew starts attacking white people, then the obvious reply is: "well, if you hate white people because some white guy 300 years ago did X, then how about those Jewish slave ships?" What's good for the goose...
The problem is when jews in the media blame Whites for slavery when even in the US South almost all the cotton and sugar slave farms were owned by jews.
They try and turn blacks against the White middle-class just like they turned the lower class against the middle in the 1917 Russian Revolution.
Very few White people ever owned slaves in the United States. That was all a Hollywood psyop with movies like Roots that jews made to form that mindset.
Yea I remember being shocked about Roots not being factual. The idea that they came and took people doesn’t really make sense. Makes a lot more sense that the tribal leaders had slaves ready to go for them.
even in the US South almost all the cotton and sugar slave farms were owned by jews.
Almost all? I don't believe you, nor your footnote-less source. Name ten.
Very few White people ever owned slaves in the United States. That was all a Hollywood psyop with movies like Roots that jews made to form that mindset.
Actually very few people in general owned slaves because owning slaves was incredibly expensive. Only a single digit percentage of people did. So yeah, very few white people owned slaves
Almost all? I don't believe you, nor your footnote-less source. Name ten.
I'm not the OP, but Jewish merchants and plantation owners were disproportionate in terms of how many slaves they owned and how many ships they ran. "Almost all" is horse shit, but there were many.
As an example, the vice president of the Confederacy was Judah Benjamin.
Hah, there is a Wikipedia category "Jewish-American Slave Owners" though I imagine it needs fleshed out a bit.
Only a single digit percentage of people did
I don't know about that either. It was relatively common in the south to have a single house slave. The plantations we think of with 100s of slaves were very rare.
Ah can assure you, we didn't have no fuckin house niggers, and this defamation needs to fucking stop. MAYBE, if you're talking about soft southern lords in Charleston, Atlanta, etc. but Appalachia couldn't afford to feed themselves let alone a whole ass human.
Sometimes you have red pilled takes and other times you make it clear you're still drinking the establishment kool-aid on the sly. We're all at different levels and some people think I'm a brainwashed liberal, but I really don't get where you're coming from.
Were almost all cotton and sugar slave farms owned by Jews? I have no idea but you said yourself above that Jews are excellent Merchants, so it's completely believable. (keep in mind that "cotton and sugar slave farms" were big businesses, not owned by the average Joe or Shem)
Did very few White people ever own slaves in the United states? This is provably true and rational, so I don't think you're replying to that.
Is our misunderstanding of history thanks to movies like Roots? Considering most people in Hamburger Land get their views from TV and movies - and those ideas are exported everywhere else - I'd say all signs point to yes.
Is Hollywood a psyop run by Jews? Ok we're getting into Alex Jones territory here (replace Jews with pot-bellied goblins), but a psyop can mean a few different things, and we know that Jews have highly represented in Hollywood's output for years. You don't even have to think it's a "bad" thing to admit it's true. Jewish businessmen started the thing. On top of that, crazy leftists and Communist radicals were worming their way into the studios for decades. We know from the House Unamerican Activities testimony and because they succeeded in totality in 2016 and after #MeToo and are now out in the open. Whether that was a literal conspiracy to take over Hollywood and use it as propaganda to conduct psychological warfare against the American people, or simply a concerted effort by simpatico radicals to push messages that they believe undermine Western tradition because they think Western tradition is bad, you'll end up with the same results. They speak with one voice and change culture.
So you can interpret this as blatant anti-semitism and dismiss it, or you can choose not to interpret it from a blue pilled normie point of view. I'm giving them some leeway in interpretation but to me it's quite in the realm of sanity.
(I used a lot of words to explain this to the fence-sitters but most people just intuitively "get it" at this point if they've been paying attention.)
Sometimes you have red pilled takes and other times you make it clear you're still drinking the establishment kool-aid on the sly. We're all at different levels and some people think I'm a brainwashed liberal, but I really don't get where you're coming from.
Anyone to my right is a crazy Nazi, anyone to my left is an insane communist. The sad thing is that I don't know anyone in real life who is more based than I am, except 'based' in a normie way like not liking blacks.
All kidding aside, I'm not really one to blindly follow one side or the other, as you don't seem to be. To believe that most slaveholders were Jews would go against everything I already know, and stretch credulity. Just because someone wrote it somewhere does not make it true! And sure, we all get most of our information from 'establishment' sources. It's a fine balance to be red-pilled while not going completely insane by believing in Q-tier crap (yes, I know only CNN believes in Q).
I have no idea but you said yourself above that Jews are excellent Merchants, so it's completely believable. (keep in mind that "cotton and sugar slave farms" were big businesses, not owned by the average Joe or Shem)
I mean, running a plantation is not really being a merchant. But quite apart from whether it is 'believable', which it is not in my view, it is an empirical claim. Were 60% of Southern slaveholders named "Shekelstein" in a region of the US that was deeply hostile to Jews? I don't know of even one, and while I am sure there were some, this is quite the absurd claim.
Did very few White people ever own slaves in the United states? This is provably true and rational, so I don't think you're replying to that.
Yes, it is true. It seemed the guy was claiming "very few white people owned slaves, it was the Jews" - that is the insanity.
Is our misunderstanding of history thanks to movies like Roots? Considering most people in Hamburger Land get their views from TV and movies - and those ideas are exported everywhere else - I'd say all signs point to yes.
I thought Roots was a show. I don't. I get my information from academic books, which while from the establishment, are often far more nuanced and accurate than the mainstream establishment narrative. This is why I reject both the left-wing and right-wing narrative on the civil war, because neither make any sort of sense to be honest.
Is Hollywood a psyop run by Jews?
There's a lot of Jews there. But there's a difference between "a lot of Jews there" and it being run in the interests of Jews. Close to none of them are religious and they all care more about their own pocketbook than they do about anything Jewish.
They speak with one voice and change culture.
Primarily, they are capitalists (ironically) and want to make money. They'll push agendas if they can and leave it to the side if they cannot. That's why Disney learned to STFU about its grooming when RDS smashed its glass jaw.
So you can interpret this as blatant anti-semitism and dismiss it, or you can choose not to interpret it from a blue pilled normie point of view. I'm giving them some leeway in interpretation but to me it's quite in the realm of sanity.
I don't necessarily have a problem with labeling Hollywood a 'psy-op', though the previous point applies. My problem is with attempting to vilify a group of people, a very small number of whom are extremely bad actors, but who for the most part are just like the rest of us. For that matter, attacking "Jewish elites" lets other elites off the hook. Surely, we don't only have a problem with elites if they belong to one ethnic group.
(I used a lot of words to explain this to the fence-sitters but most people just intuitively "get it" at this point if they've been paying attention.)
I don't sit on any fence. I reject these ideas outright. Not out of obedience like the 'normies' do, but because I believe them to be wrong. If I thought they were right, I'd have no problem endorsing them, but they are wrong.
It's not anti-semitic at all.
Merchants traded slaves just like they traded any sort of good. That's true for Jews, Greeks, overseas Chinese and every other group that traded in goods.
Now if you start blaming modern day Jews for that, then that's anti-semitic. However, if a Jew starts attacking white people, then the obvious reply is: "well, if you hate white people because some white guy 300 years ago did X, then how about those Jewish slave ships?" What's good for the goose...
The problem is when jews in the media blame Whites for slavery when even in the US South almost all the cotton and sugar slave farms were owned by jews.
They try and turn blacks against the White middle-class just like they turned the lower class against the middle in the 1917 Russian Revolution.
Very few White people ever owned slaves in the United States. That was all a Hollywood psyop with movies like Roots that jews made to form that mindset.
Yea I remember being shocked about Roots not being factual. The idea that they came and took people doesn’t really make sense. Makes a lot more sense that the tribal leaders had slaves ready to go for them.
If you think it's shocking that Roots isn't factual, wait until you find out Schindler's List isn't factual either.
Well this was when I was very young. Now I’m skeptical of any sort of historical treatment
Almost all? I don't believe you, nor your footnote-less source. Name ten.
This is literal insanity.
Actually very few people in general owned slaves because owning slaves was incredibly expensive. Only a single digit percentage of people did. So yeah, very few white people owned slaves
Yes, that is correct. But it seemed to me that he was suggesting that "white people didn't own slaves, Jews did".
I'm not the OP, but Jewish merchants and plantation owners were disproportionate in terms of how many slaves they owned and how many ships they ran. "Almost all" is horse shit, but there were many.
As an example, the vice president of the Confederacy was Judah Benjamin.
Hah, there is a Wikipedia category "Jewish-American Slave Owners" though I imagine it needs fleshed out a bit.
I don't know about that either. It was relatively common in the south to have a single house slave. The plantations we think of with 100s of slaves were very rare.
Ah can assure you, we didn't have no fuckin house niggers, and this defamation needs to fucking stop. MAYBE, if you're talking about soft southern lords in Charleston, Atlanta, etc. but Appalachia couldn't afford to feed themselves let alone a whole ass human.
Sometimes you have red pilled takes and other times you make it clear you're still drinking the establishment kool-aid on the sly. We're all at different levels and some people think I'm a brainwashed liberal, but I really don't get where you're coming from.
Were almost all cotton and sugar slave farms owned by Jews? I have no idea but you said yourself above that Jews are excellent Merchants, so it's completely believable. (keep in mind that "cotton and sugar slave farms" were big businesses, not owned by the average Joe or Shem)
Did very few White people ever own slaves in the United states? This is provably true and rational, so I don't think you're replying to that.
Is our misunderstanding of history thanks to movies like Roots? Considering most people in Hamburger Land get their views from TV and movies - and those ideas are exported everywhere else - I'd say all signs point to yes.
Is Hollywood a psyop run by Jews? Ok we're getting into Alex Jones territory here (replace Jews with pot-bellied goblins), but a psyop can mean a few different things, and we know that Jews have highly represented in Hollywood's output for years. You don't even have to think it's a "bad" thing to admit it's true. Jewish businessmen started the thing. On top of that, crazy leftists and Communist radicals were worming their way into the studios for decades. We know from the House Unamerican Activities testimony and because they succeeded in totality in 2016 and after #MeToo and are now out in the open. Whether that was a literal conspiracy to take over Hollywood and use it as propaganda to conduct psychological warfare against the American people, or simply a concerted effort by simpatico radicals to push messages that they believe undermine Western tradition because they think Western tradition is bad, you'll end up with the same results. They speak with one voice and change culture.
So you can interpret this as blatant anti-semitism and dismiss it, or you can choose not to interpret it from a blue pilled normie point of view. I'm giving them some leeway in interpretation but to me it's quite in the realm of sanity.
(I used a lot of words to explain this to the fence-sitters but most people just intuitively "get it" at this point if they've been paying attention.)
It's pretty simple, he got kicked out of club Lefty and still pines for it while he hangs out with us here.
Anyone to my right is a crazy Nazi, anyone to my left is an insane communist. The sad thing is that I don't know anyone in real life who is more based than I am, except 'based' in a normie way like not liking blacks.
All kidding aside, I'm not really one to blindly follow one side or the other, as you don't seem to be. To believe that most slaveholders were Jews would go against everything I already know, and stretch credulity. Just because someone wrote it somewhere does not make it true! And sure, we all get most of our information from 'establishment' sources. It's a fine balance to be red-pilled while not going completely insane by believing in Q-tier crap (yes, I know only CNN believes in Q).
I mean, running a plantation is not really being a merchant. But quite apart from whether it is 'believable', which it is not in my view, it is an empirical claim. Were 60% of Southern slaveholders named "Shekelstein" in a region of the US that was deeply hostile to Jews? I don't know of even one, and while I am sure there were some, this is quite the absurd claim.
Yes, it is true. It seemed the guy was claiming "very few white people owned slaves, it was the Jews" - that is the insanity.
I thought Roots was a show. I don't. I get my information from academic books, which while from the establishment, are often far more nuanced and accurate than the mainstream establishment narrative. This is why I reject both the left-wing and right-wing narrative on the civil war, because neither make any sort of sense to be honest.
There's a lot of Jews there. But there's a difference between "a lot of Jews there" and it being run in the interests of Jews. Close to none of them are religious and they all care more about their own pocketbook than they do about anything Jewish.
Primarily, they are capitalists (ironically) and want to make money. They'll push agendas if they can and leave it to the side if they cannot. That's why Disney learned to STFU about its grooming when RDS smashed its glass jaw.
I don't necessarily have a problem with labeling Hollywood a 'psy-op', though the previous point applies. My problem is with attempting to vilify a group of people, a very small number of whom are extremely bad actors, but who for the most part are just like the rest of us. For that matter, attacking "Jewish elites" lets other elites off the hook. Surely, we don't only have a problem with elites if they belong to one ethnic group.
I don't sit on any fence. I reject these ideas outright. Not out of obedience like the 'normies' do, but because I believe them to be wrong. If I thought they were right, I'd have no problem endorsing them, but they are wrong.