Slavery In America Did Not Begin
In 1619, And Other Things The
New York Times Gets Wrong

For starters who's the "we?" FTA: "We “improved” on it, of course; the American zeal for “efficiency” drove escalating brutality (although Anglo cotton plantations never reached the perigee of inhumanity achieved by the Francophone sugar plantations of Haiti and Louisiana)." Did you just pull the notion that "we" improved upon it out of your arse? Are you the least bit familiar with the slave industry in the Muslim world? You don't think emasculation of male slaves might have been e teency bit more brutal? Nice try but open a book next time. And while I'm at it you do know that slavery existed within Native American tribes right?

Does this include native American tribes enslaving other native American tribes??

Also, didn't chattle slavery (of non-convicts) come into being in the English colonies after a court case filed by a black plaintiff claiming that "his" 2 men were not actually indentured servants but actual slaves? It should also be noted that the English sold many "convicts" (mostly Scots and Irish) into slavery in the Western Hemisphere.

I'm with #1. I tire of hearing ''we'' from those people who would lecture us and assign guilt. The vast majority of Americans never owned a slave. A small fraction- less than 1%- of Americans owned plantations. Other people, except for the rich ''elites'' couldn't afford to own and maintain slaves. The rich people (including mostly northerners) bought slaves to be used as maids, cooks, gardeners, stable hands, and general servants. They were not plantation slaves, but they were slaves nevertheless. Surprisingly, we don't hear much about that. Northerners owned slaves! Heresy! I think the black leadership in this country should sue Africa for reparations, since it was Africans who captured and sold their own people to the slave trade!

Slavery existed among native American tribes long before white men and blacks ever set foot in North America. They stole and bartered women and children from each other on a regular basis. In many cases their dogs and horses were treated better. There were instances of Indians capturing other Indians and selling them into slavery in England.

"The United States Was a Footnote in Slavery’s History" Yes, slavery existed at the time North American colonization was started and thousands of years back through history. No, we weren't more enlightened as to reject it, nor was almost anyone else at the time. There was argument about it when the Country was founded but a compromise was made to allow it in order to form the a nation. Less than 100 years later we fought a horribly costly, in money and bodies, Civil War to get rid of it. No, we didn't get it all right even after that. We have it reasonably right from a legal perspective now but the hearts of some people, less each generation, are still prejudiced. However, vast opportunities are available in this Country and are open to EVERYONE. Being a citizen here is an amazing and powerful right, something that is NOT available for those who can trace their origins to slavery and other countries had their ancestors been left in peace in those countries. I might also point out that in the 1500s they also had no inside toilets and they had to do their business in the woods. That seems pretty crude, unsanitary, and environmentally unfriendly; kind of like San Francisco. My family came from Germany and Poland in the late 1800s and they had nothing to do with American Slavery. Yet, they came here to build a better life in a Country that is always striving to be better. Taking a wander back through history to criticize people of previous times is useless and a cowardly, cheap shot. They lived as they often had to and as how others lived at the time. They are long gone and have no ability to defend themselves. Historical review of this type doesn't help to inform today's society. It's character assassination, well practiced and perfected by the Left.

The United States is the only country in history which ever went to war against itself to stop the practice of slavery. ( Yes, I do recognize the whole secession argument, but the two are inescapably linked. ) If those at the Times have any integrity at all, they will do an EXTENSIVE article on the slavery that still exists, which is mainly in the moslem world. But, of course, we know they won't !!!

What affect do you think this "we" nonsense is having on young, white school children? I started looking into the slave narrative which I had been taught when I read a throwaway line in a history book. It referred simply to a 1700's slave tavern. Slaves had taverns? Money for pints? Time off? Speak to your children/grandchildren.

The NYT is obsessed with slavery, because they seem to think THEY should be the ones holding the whip, and directing the rest of us as chattel.

Indians had slaves long before any white man set foot on this continent.

They are propagandists, LYING is what they do. They do no "get things wrong" by accident or error, they do it with malice aforethought and careful planning. They LIE.

I wouldn't use the NYT to wipe my....with. That said there is no doubt slavery was evil and detrimental. If the US had never imported any slaves we would only need half the prisons we have now. I don't guess the Times will fit that into their narrative though.

So sick of the slave stories. I have never owned a slave, there are no living slaves, and frankly Scarlett, I have moved on. There is a lot of romancing the stone involved.