I'm just asking, *clears throat* whats with all of the periods? Wouldn't a single comma suffice?

already asked her =/

There were plenty of civilizations that based their economy on slavery, Rome being the most prominent example among the ancient civilizations. The major difference between slavery in the ancient world and "modern" slavery in the Americas was that the former did not make a distinction based on race and slaves could move upward socially.

Also, slavery in Brazil was equally important to the economy as it was in the American south. In fact, 37% of all traded slaves ended up in Brazil (as opposed to some 5% which ended up in the American south). Brazil was also the last country in the western hemisphere that abolished slavery in 1888. But again, the major difference was the distinction based on race which was the most prominent in the American south and which made the integration a much more difficult process than it was in other countries.

Oh, I see, it's ok for you to sit there and voice your idiotic, historically inaccurate views, but when people actually start questioning them suddenly it's time to hit the ignore button. :rolleyes: I'm not really surprised, though, if that's what you believe about slavery than I guess I shouldn't have really expected a fruitful discussion.

Maybe if you actually paid attention to one of those revisionist, anti-Southern, "Northern" textbooks you'd actually learn a thing or two.

its not that i'm ignoring you,....ok,..well maybe i am ignoring you,.....

i never said we just start enslaveing people again,....i'm just sayin that the south gets a bad wrap because if it, that pisses me off,......i didnt do it,....and because i dont demonize it doesnt mean i'm an ignorant backwoods hillbilly

Kind of inflammatory, don't you think? Let's try to keep it civil here.

Actually it does to most civilized people. The fact that you fail to understand why so many people here have such an issue with slavery and racism in the South just shows how little you understand about American and, to be more specific, Southern, history.

I don't hold slavery against any Southerners, there's enough to complain about the South for already, but my problem with this sort of romantic "Oh, pre-war South wasn't so bad...if you were white hehe" ideal is almost sad.

Also, as for the fact that lots of other societies had slaves, I wouldn't have even cared about savannah's comment if she hadn't gone out of her way to make it known that she would have wanted to be a slave owner, or if she hadn't continued to basically defend slavery. Not to mention the fact that, as far as I'm aware, no other society in modern history actively continued to oppress their slaves on the basis of racism for 100 years after slavery had been abolished.

I don't think so. I don't think people in the South are inherently evil or racist, and to take that tone is to offer an unfair prejudice. And ninety-nine times out of one hundred, you gonna hear the Southerner echo back, "a Southern man don't need him around anyhow."

So according to you, Southern slavery wasn't inherently prejudice or racist, but I am for claiming (rather correctly, I might add) that it was?

Like I said, I don't continue to hold slavery against Southerners, if I still did I might as well just hate all Americans for what was done to the Natives. But we're not talking about my feelings on Southerners, we're talking about whether or not slavery was or was not racist, or worth "demonizing."

Hmmm, sounds like I need to explain this. Or, wait...

As you can see, I completely agree with you. But you need to stop making personal attacks on other members.