Hidden History: Slave breeding in the United States

[ViCiouS]

the argument is a decades long living condition persisted...millions died and those that didn't were the stronger for it.

And advertisement in Charleston, South Carolina, in 1796, offereing fifty prime negroes for sale contained theses sentences: *** "they are not Negroes selected out of a larger gang for the purpose of a sale, but are prime, their present Owner, with great trouble and expense, selected them out of many for several years past. They were purchased for stock and breedingNegroes, and to any Planter who particularly wanted them for that purpose, they are a very choice and desirable gang." At all times "breeding slaves", "child bearing women", "breeding period", "too old to breed", etc. were familiar terms.

Slave-rearing early became the source of the largest and often the only regular profit of nearly all slaveholding farmers and of many planters in the upper South. Especially in Virginia, as Francis Corbin wrote in 1819, "miserabile dicturour principle profit depends" on the increase of our slaves. In a Virginia case in 1848, the Court said that"the scantiness of net profit from slave labor has become proverbial, and that nothing is more common than actual loss, or a benefit merely in the slow increase of capital from propagation."

(From pg. 75 of the same chapter)

The wife of a Georgia planter wrote that "many indirect inducements [are] held out to reckless propagation, which has a sort of premium offered to it in the consideration of less work and more food counterbalanced by none of the sacred responsibilities which hallow and ennoble the relation of parent and child; in short, as their lives are for the most those of mere animals, their increase is literally mere animal breeding, to which every encouragement is given, for it adds to the master's live-stock and the value of his estate."

The most careful planters everywhere considered slave-rearing of prime importance. One in Alabama, who was so liberal-minded, that he encouraged his negroes to read the Bible, described his own prosperity by saying that his slaves had been"generally healthy and very prolific, and their increase is no small matter in the item of profits." Another expressed the common opinion: "Well treated and cared for, and moderately worked, their natural increase becomes a source of great profit to their owner. Whatever therefore tends to promote their health and render them prolific, is worthy his attention.""With us the proprietor's largest source of prosperity is in the negroes he raises", said Secretary of the Treasury Howell Cobb, in 1858, when also president of the Georgia Cotton Planters' convention.

John C. Reed--also a Georgian, graduated from Princeton in 1854 and afterward a lawyer in his native State--had rare knowledge of social condition and was clear and frank in his convictions. He wrote: "Although the profits of slave-planting were considerable, the greates profit of all was what the master thought of and talked of all the day long,--the natural increase of his slaves, as he called it. His negroes were far more to him than his land." *** "Really the leading industry of the South was slave-rearing. The profit was in keeping the slaves healthy and rapidly multiplying. This could be done at little expense in agriculture where even the light workers were made to support themselves." Accordingly, he said, "many of these older sections turned, from being agricultural communities, into nurseries, rearing slaves for the younger States where virgin soil was abundant."

happy now...now no where in there is a discussion of breeding for specific traits or encouraging one genetic aspect while discouraging another. All they wanted was healthy slaves thats it. thats as far as it needed to go.

if thats your argument - after centuries of semi- kinda-sorta hardship and poor hygiene Europeans were pretty much un-changed un evolved, they still fell victim to variety of viral outbreaks, still sensitive to the sun etc etc...
Africans at home on the other hand adapted and developed immunity to malaria and various other diseases over their centuries...
And after we were kidnapped we adapted further due to centuries of harsh conditions genocide and slavery,
ok - I see you.. unfortunately it is deeper that - researchers believe the concentration of our traits in America are too high to have occurred without help.

You really never studied the history.
Start here- this book discusses domestic animal husbandry in detail - including mating of negro slaves, the problems with mulatto fertility and congenital defects and health conditions common to mulattoes, how many generations of mating mulattoes with negroes to develop ideal slaves etc...
free ebook - pg 383
Studies in Stock Breeding: An Inquiry Into the Various Phenomena Connected with the Breeding of the Domestic Animals (1902)
https://books.google.com/books?id=7zciAQAAMAAJ&dq="Anglo-Negroid+offspring"&source=gbs_navlinks_s

Ethnic Genealogy: A Research Guide: A Research Guide

The Breeding of American Slaves: True Stories of American Slave Breeding and Slave Babies

"purchased for stock and breedingNegroes"

the term "stock and breeding" refers to animal husbandry...selective breeding and bloodlines... google "stock and breeding" with the quotations and again without

chattel slaves were live stock - selective breeding of cows and horses was already commonplace and practiced with slaves-
think about it -if selling slaves was profitable. owners planning on sales were going to plan breeding to produce the most attractive slaves: large fertile men and very fertile women. When keeping a stud it was preferred he be large and skilled

 

[geechiedan]

if thats your argument - after centuries of semi- kinda-sorta hardship and poor hygiene Europeans were pretty much un-changed un evolved, they still fell victim to variety of viral outbreaks, still sensitive to the sun etc etc...
Africans at home on the other hand adapted and developed immunity to malaria and various other diseases over their centuries...
And after we were kidnapped we adapted further due to centuries of harsh conditions genocide and slavery,
ok - I see you.. unfortunately it is deeper that - researchers believe the concentration of our traits in America are too high to have occurred without help.

You really never studied the history.
Start here- this book discusses domestic animal husbandry in detail - including mating of negro slaves, the problems with mulatto fertility and congenital defects and health conditions common to mulattoes, how many generations of mating mulattoes with negroes to develop ideal slaves etc...
free ebook - pg 383
Studies in Stock Breeding: An Inquiry Into the Various Phenomena Connected with the Breeding of the Domestic Animals (1902)
https://books.google.com/books?id=7zciAQAAMAAJ&dq="Anglo-Negroid+offspring"&source=gbs_navlinks_s

Ethnic Genealogy: A Research Guide: A Research Guide

The Breeding of American Slaves: True Stories of American Slave Breeding and Slave Babies

"purchased for stock and breedingNegroes"

the term "stock and breeding" refers to animal husbandry...selective breeding and bloodlines... google "stock and breeding" with the quotations and again without

chattel slaves were live stock - selective breeding of cows and horses was already commonplace and practiced with slaves-
think about it -if selling slaves was profitable. owners planning on sales were going to plan breeding to produce the most attractive slaves: large fertile men and very fertile women. When keeping a stud it was preferred he be large and skilled

Fevers and “Ague” [chills]
Low country climate was notoriously unhealthy for Europeans and for Africans alike, but from different causes. Europeans were most susceptible to "fevers and ague" caused by mosquito-borne malaria and yellow fever. Eighteenth century planters observed that Africans were least likely to succumb to these fevers. Twentieth century anthropological research has since verified their observations. West African adults living in environments where mosquitoes transmit malaria throughout most of the year will almost never have the fever and chills and other symptoms of malaria and rarely die from the disease. The opposite of this is true for West African children, especially those under 5 years of age. Survivors have a high immunity to malaria that they pass on genetically as a sickle cell (red blood cell) trait that increased their descendants' resistance to malaria (Livingstone 1958:533–562). However, enslaved people who were immune to malaria because of sickle-cell trait or disease were subject to recurrent bouts of debilitating symptoms related to impairment of the red blood cells. Intensive, prolonged labor in high ambient temperatures such as enslaved people in the Carolinas experienced would have increased the probability of those with sickle-cell trait or disease experiencing symptoms of fatigue, joint pain, fevers and, in children, delayed growth. It is possible that many of the ill-defined malaise that enslaved people experienced and that slave owners labeled “malingering” were in fact episodes of “sickle-cell crisis.”

In respect to yellow fever that brings about a high mortality in a brief time span, people acquire immunity by contracting and surviving the disease rather than through inherited immunity. Even when people contract the fever, it is least fatal to infants and children. West Africans who came from an area where yellow fever was endemic were more likely to have been infected as children, and thus were immune to the disease by the time they arrived in Low Country. Furthermore, African infants received “passive immunity” from their mothers (Wood 1974:90–91).

“Pleurises” and “Parapneumonias”
While Africans were less likely to suffer from the fevers and chills associated with malaria and yellow fever, they were equally susceptible to Small Pox as were the English and had greater susceptibility to respiratory conditions than the English. Neither African or Western medicine could prevent the devastating effects of some of the conditions that plagued Africans. Respiratory diseases accounted for the high death rate among the enslaved who were susceptible to respiratory diseases brought on by sharp changes in weather in winter months probably exacerbated by overwork, inadequate diet and clothing. According to Wood, that whenever respiratory ailments were infectious, like influenza, pneumonia and tuberculosis, they seemed to occur among the enslaved Africans in epidemic form. In 1748, Governor Glen acknowledged that planters who invested in negroes ran the possible risk of having them “swept off” by pleurisies if not small pox.”

Small Pox

Slave sale advertisement describing Africans as small pox survivors and free of the disease.

In 1711, and again in 1770, observers recorded that enslaved Africans suffered and died from Small Pox at a rate equal to Whites (Wood 1974:77). Africans knew about Small Pox and some of them knew about inoculation. Inoculation was practiced in Senegal and other parts of Africa by the negroes. Cotton Mather learned about inoculation from his African servant. The man showed Mather his smallpox scar and told him that you: “‘…take the Juice of the Small Pox, and Cut the Skin and put in a drop: then by ’nd by a little Sick, then a few Small Pox; and no body dye of it; no body have Small Pox any more (Morais 1968:8–16).’”

This advertisement in Charleston newspaper announcing forthcoming sale of Africans from the Windward Coast; stresses their knowledge of rice culture and freedom from smallpox. It also notes that half of the Africans have had small pox in their own country, indicating awareness that people who had survived the disease had acquired immunity to it.

Many planters hired white physicians to attend enslaved people. From runaway advertisements and planter records, it is clear that there were also African doctors in Low Country, as there were in the Chesapeake, who were described variously as “Negro doctor,” “doctor, Guinea born,” “pretending to be a doctor.” “In 1749,” writes Morgan, “the master of an Igbo fugitive named Simon, thought to be harbored by slaves on Johns Island, described him as pretending “to be a doctor (Morgan 1998:626) ” Another slave owner advertising for a run away slave, as Morgan relates, described him as “‘remarkable for having a bosent (swelling?) which he tried to have cut out by, and was cured bay a doctor, Guinea born’ (Morgan 1998:626).” By 1788, there were slave-born “Negro” apprenticed-trained doctors, one of whom had even attended college (Morais 1968: 8–16). At least one enslaved woman was a doctor said to be “a good midwife and nurse, can weigh out medicines and let blood, which she has done for many years on a plantation (Morgan 1998:627).” However most slave women were nurses and midwives.


Childbirth and Childhood
“…[T]he labour (sic) of the rice plantation formerly prevented the pregnant negroes from bringing forth a long-lived offspring. It may be established as a maxim that on a plantation where there are many children the work has been moderate (John Davis Travels of four years and a half in the United States during 1798,1799,1800,1801,1802, p.86 In 1916 Travelers Impressions)

Reproductive rates of enslaved women in the Low Country resulted in growth of the population by natural increase. Their fertility exceeded that of women enslaved in the Caribbean and the Chesapeake, yet the phenomenal growth of the Low Country enslaved population during the 18th century resulted for the most part from importation of West Africans (Wood 1974:145). Strenuous work as well as the anemia of malaria, two states common among enslaved women, both adversely affected pregnancy and may have contributed to maternal miscarriages and low birth weight of infants pre-disposing them to infant mortality.

As the rate of rice production rose after 1720, there was an apparent reduced life expectancy for enslaved people, particularly infants and children, which offset the high birthrate. Morgan estimates 342 out of 1000 children died, commenting that these data are probably not representative (Morgan 1998:91). Examining data from enslaved people in the 19th century, Steckel estimates that infants died at the rate of 350 per 1000 live births and another 201 children died before their fifth birthday (Steckel 1986:733).

While Morgan (1998:93), concluded that the North American diet was adequate for enslaved adults, Kiple and Kiple (1977) Savitt (1978) and Steckel (1986) addressing the issues of enslaved people’s health, concur that the poor health of enslaved children was probably related to inadequate nutrition. According to Steckel, high rates of infant and early childhood death and small stature of children living pass infancy but dying before adulthood supports this conclusion. He points out that in slaveholder’s journals on ‘care and feeding of slaves,’ that food allowances are stated in terms of work performance and that if children are mentioned at all, the journals note they receive “‘proportionately less.’ … [food] (Steckel 1986:744).’”

https://www.nps.gov/ethnography/aah/aaheritage/lowCountry_furthRdg5.htm

In regards to disease and immunity...yes the African slaves developed immunity to CERTAIN diseases because of conditions in the motherland. But they were just as susceptible to other diseases as anyone else particularly respiratory issues. And we haven't really gained any natural defense against that. On top of that the immunities we developed for yellow fever and malaria mutated into a particularly DEBILITATING issue itself when we were moved to areas that DIDN'T have those particular diseases. Issue we're STILL dealing with TODAY.

In regards to stock and breeding... Treating people like animals brings its own set of problems that were unnecessary and could have been avoided had they NOT treated humans like animals..issues like reduced life expectancy, malnutrition for infants and children, being born undersized etc. Seems to me they had enough trouble and more concern with just trying make sure they had healthy babies PERIOD much less breed for specific things you claimed:

Humans aren't born hardwired to do anything... but its possible for one to breed offspring with high probability for high functioning intelligence (fast learning and memory) above average hand eye coordination, greater predisposition for high bone and muscle density (strength & durability) which was highly desired not only for field work but because slaves also had a very high mortality rate.
If two people with these traits have kids there is a good chance at least 3 of 5 (60%) will get most if not all of the desired traits...

You CAN'T treat people like animals and expect the same results..it just doesn't work like that for humans. So far all youve shown is that Africans were ALREADY highly developed straight from the motherland in terms of physical and intelligence having already knew how to innoculate and deal with certain diseases and ailments.

ANY traits and further developments were unintended and at BEST an ancillary benefit slave owners didn't anticipate seeing as how they had a hard enough time trying live past 40 their damn selves.

 

[sharkbait28]

you should read the thread - much of your argument has been addressed already.

I'll try and wade through this thread later tonight.

1. a good portion of Slaves were also breed with high probability for high functioning intelligence (fast learning and memory) many were skilled laborers and craftsmen
2. multiple studies already prove the exact opposite of us not being bred for intelligence
we are almost preternaturally intelligent - those studies show that nutrition directly impacts a child's ability to learn, but on average even with poor nutrition, when taught at the same level as the privileged our kids still excelled while dirt poor whites failed to compete.

This sounds like wishful thinking. Multiple studies? The entire thrust of racial theory has been that we are intellectually incapable of competing with other "races". When you give credence to the same ancient scientific ramblings which produced correlations between "race" and brain size, or lend heft to the same gang of folks who thought drilling into skulls to let blood out would alleviate diseases you know that you're reaching.

Ultimately, what you and others are failing to recognize here is that you absolutely can't have your cake and eat it too. If you accept "selective breeding" as a useful explanatory tool you can't simultaneously reject the very obvious logical corollary that black failure is rooted in the same. That's quite the pickle. The Bell Curve, Eugenics... all these fantastically retarded ideas took root by relying on the basic premise which undergirds the entire notion of "selective breeding".

no one is arguing free will or predetermination here...
fast twitch muscle fibers + raised in high altitude environment
we don't compete in that sport, and its expensive, but if we did - raise a few children with talent dedication and let them learn and practice - we would dominate it like EVERYTHING else we do.
Any sport that doesn't require access and great expense -we already dominate... and every sport that requires great expense -the ones whites and asians thought we were mentally inferior (tenni, golf, etc) to compete in... when given a chance we kick their asses there too - don't worry it won't be long until a black swimmer arrives and forces them to rewrite rules and redesign pools


this is the result of a power system centuries old.... not based on talent /genetics or merit
it is not relevant

It's interesting that you acknowledge the nuanced/complicated systemic and socio-economic factors which yield these various results while clinging to an 18th century model to explain one piece of the puzzle. Why is that?

 

[Osca Lee]

if thats your argument - after centuries of semi- kinda-sorta hardship and poor hygiene Europeans were pretty much un-changed un evolved, they still fell victim to variety of viral outbreaks, still sensitive to the sun etc etc...
Africans at home on the other hand adapted and developed immunity to malaria and various other diseases over their centuries...
And after we were kidnapped we adapted further due to centuries of harsh conditions genocide and slavery,
ok - I see you.. unfortunately it is deeper that - researchers believe the concentration of our traits in America are too high to have occurred without help.

You really never studied the history.
Start here- this book discusses domestic animal husbandry in detail - including mating of negro slaves, the problems with mulatto fertility and congenital defects and health conditions common to mulattoes, how many generations of mating mulattoes with negroes to develop ideal slaves etc...
free ebook - pg 383
Studies in Stock Breeding: An Inquiry Into the Various Phenomena Connected with the Breeding of the Domestic Animals (1902)
https://books.google.com/books?id=7zciAQAAMAAJ&dq="Anglo-Negroid+offspring"&source=gbs_navlinks_s

Ethnic Genealogy: A Research Guide: A Research Guide

The Breeding of American Slaves: True Stories of American Slave Breeding and Slave Babies

"purchased for stock and breedingNegroes"

the term "stock and breeding" refers to animal husbandry...selective breeding and bloodlines... google "stock and breeding" with the quotations and again without

chattel slaves were live stock - selective breeding of cows and horses was already commonplace and practiced with slaves-
think about it -if selling slaves was profitable. owners planning on sales were going to plan breeding to produce the most attractive slaves: large fertile men and very fertile women. When keeping a stud it was preferred he be large and skilled

man you been digging as well huh...

This shit is deeper than mfs want to accept or actually realize.

If you grew up in a small town in the south you seen the results....hell some of us are results from it. Hell in my hometown all people talk about is "Dem Lee Boys all was great ball players in every sport or Dem Lee boys part jack rabbits or one of them Lee boys pulled a engine an transmission out by himself with one arm holding the chain and the other arm holding on to the tree....bent the outside of the fenders he was pushing down so hard lifting the engine out"....now as a kid i played in that old car by the oak tree and seen the engine bay spread apart but never knew it was my dad who did it until one of the older kats in my hometown seen me downtown Dallas and we got something to eat and chatted for like 2 hours. Listening to him say over and over yalls family have always been big, fast and strong...he said he used to her his grandfather talk about your grandfather and his brothers how big they were and how they could plow fields faster than tractors and sometimes when the horses are too tired to go anymore two of them would strap up and one would guide them and they would take turns until it was done.

that alone let me know I come from a line of fieldhands breed specifically for that type of work... im one parent removed from my grandfather.he was born in the late 1800's..thats 50% of his genes from my mom going into me mixed with my dad genes

 

[ViCiouS]

In regards to stock and breeding... Treating people like animals brings its own set of problems that were unnecessary and could have been avoided had they NOT treated humans like animals..issues like reduced life expectancy, malnutrition for infants and children, being born undersized etc. Seems to me they had enough trouble and more concern with just trying make sure they had healthy babies PERIOD much less breed for specific things you claimed:
You CAN'T treat people like animals and expect the same results..it just doesn't work like that for humans. So far all youve shown is that Africans were ALREADY highly developed straight from the motherland in terms of physical and intelligence having already knew how to innoculate and deal with certain diseases and ailments.

It works exactly like that!
Do you also have a problem believing that all humans evolved from primates? If that's the case I'll stop arguing with you.
If not - you continue to argue against observable science - genetic inheritance works the same for us as it does with "animals". If it didn't medical researchers on everything from genome mapping to cancer research wouldn't depend on genealogy... There is over a century of research - and at this point your argument is still faith based instead of fact based.

Viewing us as live stock they worked the odds like they would with live stock, if 4 out of 10 babies lived past age 10 that was success! Slave breeders' primary goal isn't healthy offspring it was profit... the product needed to "look" healthy and strong. To garner the best price

Blacks in the americas have a higher occurrence of traits that were deemed marketable to slave owners (greater bone and muscle density, increased size)
Today these traits occur at a higher rate with us than is found in western Africa, on the flipside diabetes etc also occurs at a higher rate with us than found in western Africa

In general your arguments on this lack logic because:
primarily you are willfully blind to the greed inherent in European society
secondly you choose to ignore or are ignorant of the science,
third, like many others, you didn't really study the culture and economy of the period.

 

[Confucius]

You dont get it...these are things I learned in anatomy classes as well as genetics courses...the examples about the electrodes applied to black vs white vs canine is real and science. you just dont want to accept it. I don't accept the fact that blacks are bred for stupidity because we are not stupid...that is a fallacy set forth by the CAC machine. That is a way to get you to overlook all of the science supporting my stance

It works exactly like that!
Do you also have a problem believing that all humans evolved from primates? If that's the case I'll stop arguing with you.
If not - you continue to argue against observable science - genetic inheritance works the same for us as it does with "animals". If it didn't medical researchers on everything from genome mapping to cancer research wouldn't depend on genealogy... There is over a century of research - and at this point your argument is still faith based instead of fact based.

Viewing us as live stock they worked the odds like they would with live stock, if 4 out of 10 babies lived past age 10 that was success! Slave breeders' primary goal isn't healthy offspring it was profit... the product needed to "look" healthy and strong. To garner the best price

Blacks in the americas have a higher occurrence of traits that were deemed marketable to slave owners (greater bone and muscle density, increased size)
Today these traits occur at a higher rate with us than is found in western Africa, on the flipside diabetes etc also occurs at a higher rate with us than found in western Africa

In general your arguments on this lack logic because:
primarily you are willfully blind to the greed inherent in European society
secondly you choose to ignore or are ignorant of the science,
third, like many others never really studied the culture and economy of the period.

Man you have posted some gems in here. Why are still trying to convince geechie and sharkbait? They obviously do not understand BASIC genetics. Besides that, I wouldn't be surprised if one or both of them are CACs with their reasoning.
You can take a horse to water but that horse has to drink the water itself.
And they keep talking about 18th century science...these fools obviously have not read any scholarly/peer reviewed articles on the subject matter. And its out there if you know where to look.
Thats why I haven't responded to any more of their posts. its insulting and blatant ignorance.

 

[ViCiouS]

I'll try and wade through this thread later tonight.



This sounds like wishful thinking. Multiple studies? The entire thrust of racial theory has been that we are intellectually incapable of competing with other "races". When you give credence to the same ancient scientific ramblings which produced correlations between "race" and brain size, or lend heft to the same gang of folks who thought drilling into skulls to let blood out would alleviate diseases you know that you're reaching.

Ultimately, what you and others are failing to recognize here is that you absolutely can't have your cake and eat it too. If you accept "selective breeding" as a useful explanatory tool you can't simultaneously reject the very obvious logical corollary that black failure is rooted in the same. That's quite the pickle. The Bell Curve, Eugenics... all these fantastically retarded ideas took root by relying on the basic premise which undergirds the entire notion of "selective breeding".




It's interesting that you acknowledge the nuanced/complicated systemic and socio-economic factors which yield these various results while clinging to an 18th century model to explain one piece of the puzzle. Why is that?

you completely misunderstand my argument... I'm arguing genetics based on observable science and the economy & culture of the time - not racial theories... (to my knowledge every academic study already invalidates those "theories")

Multiple economic and educational studies by MIT NIST Standford U, Purdue U, etc... even Freakonomics got in on it a little more than a decade ago- the organizations studied multiple socio economic factors that effect the education of children below the poverty line... I brought up ones I've read concerning the impact of nutrition on elementary education in inner city Chicago and the Appalachia region.

Everything you listed is the surface of the rabbit hole... to any that understand the science, they already know there is no logical corollary between our challenges and genetics, just ignorance and a society rigged against us, to assist in keeping us and other races (lower class whites and immigrants) poor

everything counts... the centuries of slavery explain our current genetics, both our physical strengths and weaknesses... it isn't opinion -its science... black social educational issues and challenges (not ever failure) have nothing to do with genetics - it is cultural... if it was genetic blacks in the Caribbean would have the same issues and challenges as the Americans

 

[ViCiouS]

Man you have posted some gems in here. Why are still trying to convince geechie and sharkbait? They obviously do not understand BASIC genetics. Besides that, I wouldn't be surprised if one or both of them are CACs with their reasoning.
You can take a horse to water but that horse has to drink the water itself.
And they keep talking about 18th century science...these fools obviously have not read any scholarly/peer reviewed articles on the subject matter. And its out there if you know where to look.
Thats why I haven't responded to any more of their posts. its insulting and blatant ignorance.

I respect them...

also imo its not blatant ignorance - many in this country only know or retain information directly connected to their profession...
for example a month ago I spoke with a black female engineer in her late 30s that refused to believe the validity of evolution or trust anything scientists had to say about fossils, because she didn't know of carbon dating...

Man, even worse almost everyone has been mis-educated on many things in school and by the media -
I went to great schools and had some curious intelligent and honest teachers, but I've still had to spend the last 20 years re-educating myself...

This subject is horrific - NO One wants to think of themselves and family as being viewed as live stock or the descendants / by products of centuries of husbandry... it is one more thing that if truly comprehended should deepen your anger

 

[Confucius]

I respect them...

also imo its not blatant ignorance - many in this country only know or retain information directly connected to their profession...
for example a month ago I spoke with a black female engineer in her late 30s that refused to believe the validity of evolution or trust anything scientists had to say about fossils, because she didn't know of carbon dating...

Man, even worse almost everyone has been mis-educated on many things in school and by the media -
I went to great schools and had some curious intelligent and honest teachers, but I've still had to spend the last 20 years re-educating myself...

This subject is horrific - NO One wants to think of themselves and family as being viewed as live stock or the descendants / by products of centuries of husbandry... it is one more thing that if truly comprehended should deepen your anger

I feel you...it just gets frustrating. I guess I take it for granted. I was raised in a household where science was a must. I was exposed to these theories as a little boy so maybe I am expecting too much from some of the posters. It just seems like the genetic theory, husbandry, Punnett's square, Mendel's theory, and the Human Genome Project would be something that people pay attention to. The Human Genome Project was a worldwide effort, btw so the conspiracy theory of it being propaganda does not fly.

The fact that all significant forms of life have similar amounts of chromosomes and require match from male and female should be simple enough. Then I cannot understand how they do not get the theory of Dominant vs Recessive works. When he posted the pic of Steph Curry, I lost it...
its like how are you gona use his skin color as an example. It actually strengthens the theory of genetics being that light skin is a recessive trait and in order for it to be expressed both parents need to donate that recessive gene...whether it was recessive for the mom or dad, both donated that particular allele in order for it to manifest in Steph's light skin and light eyes...i digress

 

[ViCiouS]

I feel you...it just gets frustrating. I guess I take it for granted. I was raised in a household where science was a must. I was exposed to these theories as a little boy so maybe I am expecting too much from some of the posters. It just seems like the genetic theory, husbandry, Punnett's square, Mendel's theory, and the Human Genome Project would be something that people pay attention to. The Human Genome Project was a worldwide effort, btw so the conspiracy theory of it being propaganda does not fly.

The fact that all significant forms of life have similar amounts of chromosomes and require match from male and female should be simple enough. Then I cannot understand how they do not get the theory of Dominant vs Recessive works. When he posted the pic of Steph Curry, I lost it...
its like how are you gona use his skin color as an example. It actually strengthens the theory of genetics being that light skin is a recessive trait and in order for it to be expressed both parents need to donate that recessive gene...whether it was recessive for the mom or dad, both donated that particular allele in order for it to manifest in Steph's light skin and light eyes...i digress

unfortunately IME none of the things you mentioned in this post is common knowledge or easily retained information, even in the medical community

 

[sharkbait28]

you completely misunderstand my argument... I'm arguing genetics based on observable science and the economy & culture of the time - not racial theories... (to my knowledge every academic study already invalidates those "theories")

Multiple economic and educational studies by MIT NIST Standford U, Purdue U, etc... even Freakonomics got in on it a little more than a decade ago- the organizations studied multiple socio economic factors that effect the education of children below the poverty line... I brought up ones I've read concerning the impact of nutrition on elementary education in inner city Chicago and the Appalachia region.

Everything you listed is the surface of the rabbit hole... to any that understand the science, they already know there is no logical corollary between our challenges and genetics, just ignorance and a society rigged against us, to assist in keeping us and other races (lower class whites and immigrants) poor

everything counts... the centuries of slavery explain our current genetics, both our physical strengths and weaknesses... it isn't opinion -its science... black social educational issues and challenges (not ever failure) have nothing to do with genetics - it is cultural... if it was genetic blacks in the Caribbean would have the same issues and challenges as the Americans

Thanks for the clarification bruh, I'll wade through this thread later. I don't know that it's necessarily true that 'any who understand science know there is no logical corollary between our challenges and genetics'. There's a long, and not particularly fringe, scientific tradition of ascribing our challenges to genetics. I appreciate that you understand this isn't the case but to dismiss the inverse corollary between being bred for power and being bred to be servile/stupid out of hand seems a bit disingenuous to me. I'll freely admit that I'm no geneticist but I'm fiercely critical of the "racial" world view in the first place.

Regardless, I respect your obvious knowledge and your ability to frame your point of view in a way that doesn't come across as massively douchey.

 

[Confucius]

unfortunately IME none of the things you mentioned in this post is common knowledge or easily retained information, even in the medical community

What do you do,if I may ask?

 

[Confucius]

Thanks for the clarification bruh, I'll wade through this thread later. I don't know that it's necessarily true that 'any who understand science know there is no logical corollary between our challenges and genetics'. There's a long, and not particularly fringe, scientific tradition of ascribing our challenges to genetics. I appreciate that you understand this isn't the case but to dismiss the inverse corollary between being bred for power and being bred to be servile/stupid out of hand seems a bit disingenuous to me. I'll freely admit that I'm no geneticist but I'm fiercely critical of the "racial" world view in the first place.

Regardless, I respect your obvious knowledge and your ability to frame your point of view in a way that doesn't come across as massively douchey.

If I am being an asshole, my bad...
Please just read some of the stuff Vicious posted when you have time. You seem intelligent in with the way you debate. I am sure it will make sense if you approach it with an open mind and ignore the religious and faith based aspects we have been indoctrinated with. Those articles he posted are concise and paint a pretty clear picture
again, my bad if i am seeming like an asshole. I am passionate about a few things in life and this is one (basketball is another)

 

[sharkbait28]

If I am being an asshole, my bad...
Please just read some of the stuff Vicious posted when you have time. You seem intelligent in with the way you debate. I am sure it will make sense if you approach it with an open mind and ignore the religious and faith based aspects we have been indoctrinated with. Those articles he posted are concise and paint a pretty clear picture
again, my bad if i am seeming like an asshole. I am passionate about a few things in life and this is one (basketball is another)

No harm and no foul bruh. I've definitely been kind of an asshole in certain debates around here when I knew I was right
I didn't even read the thread so I came into it from the wrong angle in the first place. I like taking the other aside in arguments to help sharpen/form an opinion when I'm not too well versed in a subject. It's an old habit that usually serves me well haha. Anyways, thanks for the food for the thought guys. Will read this thread and come back if I have anything useful to add.

 

[ViCiouS]

What do you do,if I may ask?

my last series of jobs I was tech analyst / IT managment in a few investment banks & brokerages
currently I'm helping to launch an entertainment company

 

[Confucius]

my last series of jobs I was tech analyst / IT managment in a few investment banks & brokerages
currently I'm helping to launch an entertainment company

It's cool that you are into the biology aspects t of life even though your field doesn't necessarily require it

 

[geechiedan]

It works exactly like that!
Do you also have a problem believing that all humans evolved from primates? If that's the case I'll stop arguing with you.
If not - you continue to argue against observable science - genetic inheritance works the same for us as it does with "animals". If it didn't medical researchers on everything from genome mapping to cancer research wouldn't depend on genealogy... There is over a century of research - and at this point your argument is still faith based instead of fact based.

Viewing us as live stock they worked the odds like they would with live stock, if 4 out of 10 babies lived past age 10 that was success! Slave breeders' primary goal isn't healthy offspring it was profit... the product needed to "look" healthy and strong. To garner the best price

Blacks in the americas have a higher occurrence of traits that were deemed marketable to slave owners (greater bone and muscle density, increased size)
Today these traits occur at a higher rate with us than is found in western Africa, on the flipside diabetes etc also occurs at a higher rate with us than found in western Africa

In general your arguments on this lack logic because:
primarily you are willfully blind to the greed inherent in European society
secondly you choose to ignore or are ignorant of the science,
third, like many others, you didn't really study the culture and economy of the period.

I'm not sure if your just making this shit up or embellishing on some report but 4 out of 10 mortality rate in breeding anything is NOT a success. Its a waste of time, energy and resources. I'm not even sure you read the article I posted in my response. If thats the best they could get under those circumstances then they take what they can get but high mortality rates in live stock of any kind is a waste.

Also you cut out two parts of my response...the end of the part you did respond to...

ANY traits and further developments were unintended and at BEST an ancillary benefit slave owners didn't anticipate seeing as how they had a hard enough time trying live past 40 their damn selves.

youre trying to attach some sort of genius science to what they did as if they understood the long term affects of their actions when in reality I don't see any intelligent method.

The idea that the middle passage killed off the "weak ones" is insulting to those people who had to endure that shit considering that the cargo of slaves they treated so inhumanely were by and large already skilled individuals in some way. And that was a LOSS of money..you don't pay for 500 slaves in africa just to arrive in america with 325. Thats a WASTE of resources. Thats not scientific.

You don't force women to have as many babies as possible only to watch the majority die before the age of 5 due to MALNUTRITION and decrepit disease festering conditions easily correctable issues mind you. Thats not scientific at all.

Slave owners rarely permitted the mother and child to remain together through the course of a two year weaning period. Returning the mother to her regularly assigned duties as soon as possible was the optimum goal. Therefore,“children born on southern plantations were likely to be kept together in crèches [or weaning houses]” (Coelho and McGuire, 1999). These crèches were usually a shoddily constructed one-room building with no sanitary facilities. The children did not wear diapers, and relieved themselves at will. Their attire was limited to a long, tattered shirt. Shoes for children were also unheard of, since this was a “luxury” item reserved for adolescent and adult field workers. For These reasons, the chance of small children contracting hookworm and similar worm-borne parasites was extreme. Malaria was also endemic to weaning houses. Gaps in the construction of the walls and ceilings, and lack of window glass provided ready access for mosquitos to a stationary human blood supply.
http://www.academia.edu/1788392/Chi..._Antebellum_South_A_What_Came_First_Conundrum

When enslaved males turned 15 years old–and younger in some cases–they had their first inspection. Boys who were under-developed, had their testicles castrated and sent to the market or used on the farm.
http://atlantablackstar.com/2014/11...farms-during-slavery-that-you-may-not-know/3/

Underdeveloped would more than likely be because of malnutrition and horrendous living conditions more than deficiencies in genetic make up. Again MAN MADE CORRECTABLE ISSUES. So slave owners were literally pruning the "weak ones" over a situation they created because of ignorance of prenatal care and pediatrics of any sort and basic malnutrition. Thats not scientific at all.

And you want to give cacs credit for that shit? Again YOUR WORDS:

you fail to realize the type of slavery in North America never existed before... many have said that it improved on the efficency of previous forms of slavery in many ways

improved in what ways and who are the many?? Diseased filled living quarters doesn't seem like an improvement to me.

Humans aren't born hardwired to do anything... but its possible for one to breed offspring with high probability for high functioning intelligence (fast learning and memory) above average hand eye coordination, greater predisposition for high bone and muscle density (strength & durability) which was highly desired not only for field work but because slaves also had a very high mortality rate.
If two people with these traits have kids there is a good chance at least 3 of 5 (60%) will get most if not all of the desired traits...

From what I've read NONE of what youre talking about seems to be happening in a conscious effort..If anything they seemed to be happy just to have a kid that survived the first 10 years RELATIVELY okay never mind increased eye/hand coordination and faster learning/memory abilities.

again YOUR words:

As to the knowledge- any idiot paying attention during dog and horse breeding would see the patterns... they were already manipulating / breeding the type of cotton and tobacco plants for easier harvesting and increased yield, so after one or 2 generations of slaves reproducing it was a no brainer that they could efficiently breed heartier stock that had an added benefit that they can mentally break offspring from childhood...
Just like racehorse breeding they kept records on offspring from high functioning slaves.
Everything from how many acres they were able to plant in a day and how many lbs of x they harvested in a day to proficiency, learning ability, and efficiency of skilled tradesmen (blacksmith tanner carpenter mason etc)... they allowed the slaves to marry but still forced mating with chosen slaves to breed whatever talents they desired or would be more profitable for sale.

so your saying they factored in the malaria, hook worm and other diseases, malnutrition, deplorable living conditions and absolute abusive child rearing and high mortality rates on purpose because thats how you raise the best grade of stock. thats an EFFICIENT WAY to raise live stock right.. Thats what what you do with hogs and cows and horses..right, raise them around disease and cesspool conditions on purpose and the best will emerge.

You try to make it sound like those cacs were walking around the plantation with lab coats and clip boards when in reality it wasn't nearly as "scientific." and any concentrated genetic traits and benefits was NOT because of the treatment but DESPITE it.

 

[ViCiouS]

It's cool that you are into the biology aspects t of life even though your field doesn't necessarily require it

not really - I grew up reading some of my mom's nursing text books I was supposed to go into medicine or physics, but in college I fell into communication technologies 3 years before the PC boom n the internet went mainstream.

 

[ViCiouS]

Have you actually read what I wrote or were just skimming through?
Do you believe that all humans evolved from primates?

I'm not sure if your just making this shit up or embellishing on some report but 4 out of 10 mortality rate in breeding anything is NOT a success. Its a waste of time, energy and resources. I'm not even sure you read the article I posted in my response. If thats the best they could get under those circumstances then they take what they can get but high mortality rates in live stock of any kind is a waste.

have you ever learned about or read anything on animal husbandry? The processes on how hybrids are created in search of creating a new breed? the mortality rate of hybrids during the process? how traits are reinforced or bred out?

you're trying to attach some sort of genius science to what they did as if they understood the long term affects of their actions when in reality I don't see any intelligent method.

The idea that the middle passage killed off the "weak ones" is insulting to those people who had to endure that shit considering that the cargo of slaves they treated so inhumanely were by and large already skilled individuals in some way. And that was a LOST of money..you don't pay for 500 slaves in africa just to arrive in america with 325. Thats a WASTE of resources. Thats not scientific.

You don't force women to have as many babies as possible only to watch the majority die before the age of 5 due to MALNUTRITION and decrepit disease festering conditions easily correctable issues mind you. Thats not scientific at all.

Again - you are ignorant of the history, economics, and also confusing genetic engineering vs animal husbandry- at no time have I inferred any engineering but you continue to imply it.
btw- animal husbandry is something that humans have done to genetically modify live stock and domesticated animals for 2 0r 3 millenia...

The slaves that didn't survive the trip were not physiologically strong enough to survive the voyage - period- no matter how you put it, their immune systems were not strong enough to adapt to the harsh environment

The modern business term for lost slaves on the voyage is inventory shrinkage - most times its covered by insurance to ensure profit for the voyage... yes some trips were outright losses: a ship destined for Jamaica with +170 slaves but only arrived with 6 survivors - but lost shipments of raw materials and finished goods and slaves to pirates and weather was not uncommon...

The high mortality rate was due to capitalism... the endeavor must turn a profit, if a few black babies die... "the slave will get pregnant again"

When enslaved males turned 15 years old–and younger in some cases–they had their first inspection. Boys who were under-developed, had their testicles castrated and sent to the market or used on the farm.
http://atlantablackstar.com/2014/11...farms-during-slavery-that-you-may-not-know/3/

Slave owners rarely permitted the mother and child to remain together through the course of a two year weaning period. Returning the mother to her regularly assigned duties as soon as possible was the optimum goal. Therefore,“children born on southern plantations were likely to be kept together in crèches [or weaning houses]” (Coelho and McGuire, 1999). These crèches were usually a shoddily constructed one-room building with no sanitary facilities. The children did not wear diapers, and relieved themselves at will. Their attire was limited to a long, tattered shirt. Shoes for children were also unheard of, since this was a “luxury” item reserved for adolescent and adult field workers. For These reasons, the chance of small children contracting hookworm and similar worm-borne parasites was extreme. Malaria was also endemic to weaning houses. Gaps in the construction of the walls and ceilings, and lack of window glass provided ready access for mosquitos to a stationary human blood supply.
http://www.academia.edu/1788392/Chi..._Antebellum_South_A_What_Came_First_Conundrum

Underdeveloped would more than likely be because of malnutrition and horrendous living conditions more than deficiencies in genetic make up. Again MAN MADE CORRECTABLE ISSUES. So slave owners were literally pruning the "weak ones" over a situation they created because of ignorance of prenatal care and pediatrics of any sort and basic malnutrition. Thats not scientific at all.

you continue to prove my point - how can you post this:
When enslaved males turned 15 years old–and younger in some cases–they had their first inspection. Boys who were under-developed, had their testicles castrated and sent to the market or used on the farm.
but still not comprehend genetic manipulation?

If what you are arguing here:
Underdeveloped would more than likely be because of malnutrition and horrendous living conditions more than deficiencies in genetic make up
was true? then almost every 15 y/o at that farm / plantation would be underdeveloped -...no?
In any case if the developed boys are the only ones passing on their genes it would mean the next generation of slaves will have less under developed 15 y/o boys....

Its still a matter of greed - not ignorance, slaves weren't people but property that they intended to maintain as inexpensively as possible- so they treated slaves the way they treat live stock and just like live stock they were bred for size to make profit

And you want to give cacs credit for that shit? Again YOUR WORDS:

How do you see it as assigning credit - while I'm trying to indict and lay the blame at their feet?

From what I've read NONE of what youre talking about seems to be happening in a conscious effort..If anything they seemed to be happy just to have a kid that survived the first 10 years RELATIVELY okay never mind increases eye hand coordination and faster learning/memory abilities.

again YOUR words:

again - animal husbandry....

the profit was in large slaves for males, fertile slaves for females both held much higher value... and slaves skilled in a craft - that was the goal and eventually they started also breeding for color

Side note: Many slave owners took out title loans with their slaves as collateral, some others included appraised slaves in their assets when looking for backing for a new venture or when acquiring real estate
This would go a long way to why an owner would want maxim value even from slaves he does't intend to sell

Unfortunately based on your posts so far, your reading is limited when it comes to the subjects being debated in this thread
did you read any of the ebook I posted? or try to look at or access any of the other books?

so your saying they factored in the malaria, hook worm and other diseases, malnutrition, deplorable living conditions and absolute abusive child rearing and high mortality rates on purpose because thats how you raise the best grade of stock. thats an EFFICIENT WAY to raise live stock right.. Thats what what you do with hogs and cows and horses..right, raise them around disease and cesspool conditions on purpose and the best will emerge.

You try to make it sound like those cacs were walking around the plantation with lab coats and clip boards when in reality it wasn't nearly as "scientific."

no - as I've argued repeatedly the slave owners bred us for strength and size using the same methods of animal husbandry for profit.
The poor conditions were cheaper to maintain and many times slaves were more resilient than live stock
I've never stated or inferred that the horrid conditions were part of breeding - but instead that they were an additional factor in how certain of our dominant traits became common traits

 

[muckraker10021]

Side note: Many slave owners took out title loans with their slaves as collateral, some others included appraised slaves in their assets when looking for backing for a new venture or when acquiring real estate
This would go a long way to why an owner would want maxim value even from slaves he does't intend to sell

All true ViCiouS
Basic acknowledged American history for those who take a few weeks out of their lives to read & understand & comprehend the extremely short bloody
history of the United States of America,— 240 years old since the Declaration Of Independence of 1776.

Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration Of Independence used his slaves as collateral to get a loan he needed to fix and improve his mansion

http://www.factfiend.com/thomas-jefferson-used-slaves-collateral-loan/

The U.S. first POTUS George Washington whose picture has been on the One Dollar denomination Federal Reserve Note since that private bank "The Federal Reserve" took over the United States of America's money system in 1913

— George Washington also used he and his wife's slaves as collateral for bank loans. He was so $$$$$$$$$ financially dependent on his hundreds of slaves that even though he told friends that he wanted to "free" his slaves, he waited until after his death to do so— his will stated that his slaves were to be freed upon his death. George Washington was also a slave hunter. When one of his "prized" slaves ran away, he posted a reward and sent the slave catchers after them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/16/opinion/george-washington-slave-catcher.html

 

[geechiedan]

Have you actually read what I wrote or were just skimming through?
Do you believe that all humans evolved from primates?


have you ever learned about or read anything on animal husbandry? The processes on how hybrids are created in search of creating a new breed? the mortality rate of hybrids during the process? how traits are reinforced or bred out?


Again - you are ignorant of the history, economics, and also confusing genetic engineering vs animal husbandry- at no time have I inferred any engineering but you continue to imply it.
btw- animal husbandry is something that humans have done to genetically modify live stock and domesticated animals for 2 0r 3 millenia...

The slaves that didn't survive the trip were not physiologically strong enough to survive the voyage - period- no matter how you put it, their immune systems were not strong enough to adapt to the harsh environment

The modern business term for lost slaves on the voyage is inventory shrinkage - most times its covered by insurance to ensure profit for the voyage... yes some trips were outright losses: a ship destined for Jamaica with +170 slaves but only arrived with 6 survivors - but lost shipments of raw materials and finished goods and slaves to pirates and weather was not uncommon...

The high mortality rate was due to capitalism... the endeavor must turn a profit, if a few black babies die... "the slave will get pregnant again"

the first rule of animal husbandry is to provide as disease free an environment as possible the slaves were treated worst than animals.

you continue to prove my point - how can you post this:
When enslaved males turned 15 years old–and younger in some cases–they had their first inspection. Boys who were under-developed, had their testicles castrated and sent to the market or used on the farm.
but still not comprehend genetic manipulation?


If what you are arguing here:
Underdeveloped would more than likely be because of malnutrition and horrendous living conditions more than deficiencies in genetic make up
was true? then almost every 15 y/o at that farm / plantation would be underdeveloped -...no?
In any case if the developed boys are the only ones passing on their genes it would mean the next generation of slaves will have less under developed 15 y/o boys....

Its still a matter of greed - not ignorance, slaves weren't people but property that they intended to maintain as inexpensively as possible- so they treated slaves the way they treat live stock and just like live stock they were bred for size to make profit

Its a matter of stupidity because better conditions and treatment would have made the pruning less necessary you would think people well versed in animal husbandry would understand that if they did and did it anyway then theyre stupid and evil. The idea that capitalism is the reason for such callous and CARELESS actions that clearly eat into profit potential doesn't make sense for a people that you claimed made slavery more efficient than it was in the past.

How do you see it as assigning credit - while I'm trying to indict and lay the blame at their feet?

because it seems like you agree with the theory that cacs supposed manipulations are the reason blacks are better specimens today..that doesn't sound like an indictment.

again - animal husbandry....

the profit was in large slaves for males, fertile slaves for females both held much higher value... and slaves skilled in a craft - that was the goal and eventually they started also breeding for color

Side note: Many slave owners took out title loans with their slaves as collateral, some others included appraised slaves in their assets when looking for backing for a new venture or when acquiring real estate
This would go a long way to why an owner would want maxim value even from slaves he does't intend to sell.

no - as I've argued repeatedly the slave owners bred us for strength and size using the same methods of animal husbandry for profit.
The poor conditions were cheaper to maintain and many times slaves were more resilient than live stock
I've never stated or inferred that the horrid conditions were part of breeding - but instead that they were an additional factor in how certain of our dominant traits became common traits

1. They weren't using the same methods as animal husbandry if they allowed disease to fester among the stock.

2. breeding for healthy individuals period and breeding for specific traits like you mentioned are two different things.

And slaves skilled in a craft is just handed down knowledge.. Skills TAUGHT from imported slaves who had those skills ALREADY. Plus it wasn't like they were bombarded with multiple options. Those skillsets they were taught was pretty much all they were going to be doing for the rest of their lives anyway..you tend to get pretty good at something you keep doing a thousand times a year. So the idea of breeding for higher intelligence is just silly.

Also while there were a few diseases blacks had immunities to which was something they got from the motherland..many of the other diseases they were JUST AS SUSCEPTIBLE TO as cacs. The same cacs that were on the ships and living on the plantations and they survived so this idea of these harsh conditions and treatment burnishing black supermen immune to any disease thrown at them is just not true since many of the issues are diseases that we deal with today or if not its because its been eradicated in the general population primarily due to better sanitation and cleaner conditions overall.

 

[ViCiouS]

the first rule of animal husbandry is to provide as disease free an environment as possible the slaves were treated worst than animals.


Its a matter of stupidity because better conditions and treatment would have made the pruning less necessary you would think people well versed in animal husbandry would understand that if they did and did it anyway then theyre stupid and evil. The idea that capitalism is the reason for such callous and CARELESS actions that clearly eat into profit potential doesn't make sense for a people that you claimed made slavery more efficient than it was in the past.


because it seems like you agree with the theory that cacs supposed manipulations are the reason blacks are better specimens today..that doesn't sound like an indictment.


1. They weren't using the same methods as animal husbandry if they allowed disease to fester among the stock.

2. breeding for healthy individuals period and breeding for specific traits like you mentioned are two different things.

And slaves skilled in a craft is just handed down knowledge.. Skills TAUGHT from imported slaves who had those skills ALREADY. Plus it wasn't like they were bombarded with multiple options. Those skillsets they were taught was pretty much all they were going to be doing for the rest of their lives anyway..you tend to get pretty good at something you keep doing a thousand times a year. So the idea of breeding for higher intelligence is just silly.

Also while there were a few diseases blacks had immunities to which was something they got from the motherland..many of the other diseases they were JUST AS SUSCEPTIBLE TO as cacs. The same cacs that were on the ships and living on the plantations and they survived so this idea of these harsh conditions and treatment burnishing black supermen immune to any disease thrown at them is just not true since many of the issues are diseases that we deal with today or if not its because its been eradicated in the general population primarily due to better sanitation and cleaner conditions overall.

1. sanitary standards for medicine and science didn't start becoming common place until the very late 1800's - so you are dead wrong about historical husbandry, which you happen to allude to in the last point of your post

2. Slaves had to be trained in european trades - these trades included blacksmithing: while western africans would have known how to smith iron they had to learn how to smith steel... carpentry and masonry were also trades that had to be learned from europeans.. your idea that skills were just passed on orally is also problematic for reasons I won't go into tonight
Also if you think carpentry and smithing require little intelligence just repeat daily - it shows how woefully sheltered you are... (warning: my father was a master carpenter)
breeding for healthy individuals period and breeding for specific traits like you mentioned are two different things.
exactly - our health was not profitable, but our size strength and fertility were very profitable

because it seems like you agree with the theory that cacs supposed manipulations are the reason blacks are better specimens today..that doesn't sound like an indictment.

brother, if you truly comprehended what they did and continue to do to us- you wouldn't have any problem perceiving my posts as an indictment

 

[geechiedan]

1. sanitary standards for medicine and science didn't start becoming common place until the very late 1800's - so you are dead wrong about historical husbandry, which you happen to allude to in the last point of your post

Even As Colonial Life Advanced, Animal Husbandry Still Lagged
in what way..YOU said animal husbandry was millenia old and the slave masters were using techniques to pinpoint exact aspects they wanted to develop in slaves using those techniques..turns out for MUCH of the atlantic slave trade times they were just bumblefucking around as far as breeding was concerned. At high mortality rates and disease rates they were lucky to get as many healthy individuals that they got in the first place.

2. Slaves had to be trained in european trades - these trades included blacksmithing: while western africans would have known how to smith iron they had to learn how to smith steel... carpentry and masonry were also trades that had to be learned from europeans.. your idea that skills were just passed on orally is also problematic for reasons I won't go into tonight
Also if you think carpentry and smithing require little intelligence just repeat daily - it shows how woefully sheltered you are... (warning: my father was a master carpenter)

I never said or inferred that smithing, farming or carpentry required little intelligence and I never said that skills were passed on orally either. I said the africans imported were ALREADY skilled which implies high functioning intelligence. And those slaves taught the next generation. And if youre doing one particular job for long periods you tend to excel at it just by sheer rote function among other things. There is a science and intelligence steph curry brings to his job but a large aspect of why he does what he does so well is because he does it all the fucking time..over and over again. He's not some multitasking ballplayer/brain surgeon/race car driver/rocket scientist...he's a basketball player only and thats all he does and he excels at it. The same with a carpenter, the same with a blacksmith, the same with a farmer. There is no insult in that.

breeding for healthy individuals period and breeding for specific traits like you mentioned are two different things.

exactly - our health was not profitable, but our size strength and fertility were very profitable

if you have size strength and good fertility you are by definition a healthy individual. So what you wrote makes no sense.

brother, if you truly comprehended what they did and continue to do to us- you wouldn't have any problem perceiving my posts as an indictment

I take issue with this notion that cacs consciously designed "super slaves" (chris rocks term since he was positing the same theory) something that you mentioned (but its possible for one to breed offspring with high probability for high functioning intelligence (fast learning and memory) above average hand eye coordination, greater predisposition for high bone and muscle density (strength & durability) . At BEST they forced slaves to reproduce and took whatever basically healthy ones they could get and thats it.

“ The black is a better athlete to begin with because he's been bred to be that way, because of his high thighs and big thighs that goes up into his back, and they can jump higher and run faster because of their bigger thighs and he's bred to be the better athlete because this goes back all the way to the Civil War when during the slave trade … the slave owner would breed his big black to his big woman so that he could have a big black kid …[2] ”
- jimmy the greek

that statement discounts and hand waves all the hard work, intelligence and dedication that black athletes put into their lives and endeavors. If you look at the statement another way what it says is that if it weren't for the machinations of white men, todays black athletes and black americans period wouldn't be able to achieve what they have done in the last 100 years.

That doesn't seem like an indictment and they certainly don't take it as one.

I'm done going in circles..suffice it to say we will never agree on this.

 

[ViCiouS]

Even As Colonial Life Advanced, Animal Husbandry Still Lagged
in what way..YOU said animal husbandry was millenia old and the slave masters were using techniques to pinpoint exact aspects they wanted to develop in slaves using those techniques..turns out for MUCH of the atlantic slave trade times they were just bumblefucking around as far as breeding was concerned. At high mortality rates and disease rates they were lucky to get as many healthy individuals that they got in the first place.


I never said or inferred that smithing, farming or carpentry required little intelligence and I never said that skills were passed on orally either. I said the africans imported were ALREADY skilled which implies high functioning intelligence. And those slaves taught the next generation. And if youre doing one particular job for long periods you tend to excel at it just by sheer rote function among other things. There is a science and intelligence steph curry brings to his job but a large aspect of why he does what he does so well is because he does it all the fucking time..over and over again. He's not some multitasking ballplayer/brain surgeon/race car driver/rocket scientist...he's a basketball player only and thats all he does and he excels at it. The same with a carpenter, the same with a blacksmith, the same with a farmer. There is no insult in that.

breeding for healthy individuals period and breeding for specific traits like you mentioned are two different things.

if you have size strength and good fertility you are by definition a healthy individual. So what you wrote makes no sense.



I take issue with this notion that cacs consciously designed "super slaves" (chris rocks term since he was positing the same theory) something that you mentioned (but its possible for one to breed offspring with high probability for high functioning intelligence (fast learning and memory) above average hand eye coordination, greater predisposition for high bone and muscle density (strength & durability) . At BEST they forced slaves to reproduce and took whatever basically healthy ones they could get and thats it.

“ The black is a better athlete to begin with because he's been bred to be that way, because of his high thighs and big thighs that goes up into his back, and they can jump higher and run faster because of their bigger thighs and he's bred to be the better athlete because this goes back all the way to the Civil War when during the slave trade … the slave owner would breed his big black to his big woman so that he could have a big black kid …[2] ”
- jimmy the greek

that statement discounts and hand waves all the hard work, intelligence and dedication that black athletes put into their lives and endeavors. If you look at the statement another way what it says is that if it weren't for the machinations of white men, todays black athletes and black americans period wouldn't be able to achieve what they have done in the last 100 years.

That doesn't seem like an indictment and they certainly don't take it as one.

I'm done going in circles..suffice it to say we will never agree on this.

before I respond to this post in detail - please answer a question for me-

do you believe that all humans evolved from ancient primates?

 

[geechiedan]

before I respond to this post in detail - please answer a question for me-

do you believe that all humans evolved from ancient primates?

yes I believe in evolution

 

[ViCiouS]

yes I believe in evolution

ok - just checking....

To be clear - I'm never arguing that genetics trumps free will, individuality, imagination, self discipline or determination...

My argument concerns only (for better or worse) the concentration of dominant traits in our physiology that isn't common in any other population.
Those traits allow us to recuperate from injuries faster, and generally we are more resilient and athletic -but no matter how great your talent nothing comes without hard work.
On the flipside our population is also more prone to have circulatory issues, heart disease, and diabetes.

Look -you posted very few facts and continue to share a lot of suppositions and your "feelings" and supported them by using magical thinking and poor logic...
I get it- the subject rubs you the wrong way and you disagree. but you are ill informed on these subjects:
the North American slave trade
slavery in the americas
colonial and early americas slave economies
biology and genetics
and now trades...
With all due respect you lack knowledge of enough facts to debate with me in these things with google as your only tool.

Even As Colonial Life Advanced, Animal Husbandry Still Lagged
in what way..YOU said animal husbandry was millenia old and the slave masters were using techniques to pinpoint exact aspects they wanted to develop in slaves using those techniques..turns out for MUCH of the atlantic slave trade times they were just bumblefucking around as far as breeding was concerned. At high mortality rates and disease rates they were lucky to get as many healthy individuals that they got in the first place.

First you confuse genetic engineering with husbandry and your last argument was that I was wrong because of sanitary conditions used in modern husbandry was in use at the time and not present for slaves - but after I corrected you -you then want to argue that because modern techniques were not used it would be less effective?

unfortunately genetic manipulation doesn't work like that... and yes animal husbandry existed for millenia -its how wolves were domesticated and bred to become the countless different breeds of dogs we have today - same goes for cattle horses donkeys, sheep, goats... for example in one region of europe, the germanic people were able to distinctly develop and breed various pinchers, rottweilers and shepherds... very different dog breeds but all from the same ancestors. BTW all instances of early genetic manipulation incur high mortality rates.

"pinpoint exact aspects" these are your words, never mine...
one more time, my argument on this is:
Slave owners bred slaves for desired and profitable traits of size strength and fertility, in some cases slaves were bred not for suitability in the field but for skilled trades. The combination of selective breeding and atrocious living conditions contributed to a high mortality rate among slaves but also concentrated our dominant traits until they became common traits in our community.

I never said or inferred that smithing, farming or carpentry required little intelligence and I never said that skills were passed on orally either. I said the africans imported were ALREADY skilled which implies high functioning intelligence. And those slaves taught the next generation. And if youre doing one particular job for long periods you tend to excel at it just by sheer rote function among other things. There is a science and intelligence steph curry brings to his job but a large aspect of why he does what he does so well is because he does it all the fucking time..over and over again. He's not some multitasking ballplayer/brain surgeon/race car driver/rocket scientist...he's a basketball player only and thats all he does

I never said or inferred that smithing, farming or carpentry required little intelligence and I never said that skills were passed on orally either. I said the africans imported were ALREADY skilled which implies high functioning intelligence. And those slaves taught the next generation. And if youre doing one particular job for long periods you tend to excel at it just by sheer rote function among other things. There is a science and intelligence steph curry brings to his job but a large aspect of why he does what he does so well is because he does it all the fucking time..over and over again. He's not some multitasking ballplayer/brain surgeon/race car driver/rocket scientist...he's a basketball player only and thats all he does and he excels at it. The same with a carpenter, the same with a blacksmith, the same with a farmer. There is no insult in that

In this one paragraph you contradict yourself and show that you know little to nothing of the trades I mentioned... belittling what you don't understand, but ending with "there is no insult to that".
Farming is a skill but is not considered a craft / or skilled trade, so for purposes of this discussion I did not include it, nor will I. Masonry, carpentry, smithing, tanning, tailor, etc... but I'll focus on carpentry and smithing because I know the most about those 2.
Most slaves that came across had agricultural and artisan skillsets most did not have the above skills before crossing - and as I mentioned before even if a slave was a carpenter or blacksmith in western Africa they required much further training in the Americas... A blacksmith is not only making horse shoes and shoeing or crafting tools... It is creating alloys and steel and crafting tools and other items from design plans or models - It requires constant analasis and a through knowledge of metal properties, metal work - I wouldn't call it repetitive... especially if apprenticed to a master blacksmith
A journeyman carpenter is a skilled builder- that works with geometry... a master carpenter was pretty much a structural engineer -thinks in terms of load energy and material strength of all woods, able to design and build structures using different woods and even knew how to incorporate or account for masonry. Also a furniture designer. Again not repetitive or simple

Like I said before both of these take over 1o years of long days to master... And in those days they really had to improvise around shortages and be inventive on how to make changes. Do you have any idea how many patents were filed by slave owners thanks to a slave's ingenuity? (think cotton gin)

I won't even bother to school you on how much mental agility pattern recognition and acuity it takes to play on an elite level in the NBA ...

if you have size strength and good fertility you are by definition a healthy individual. So what you wrote makes no sense.

It makes no sense to you because you lack knowledge and perspective -
dude -using your logic anyone born developmentally retarded or with giantisim or a host of other congenital disorders is considered healthy

I take issue with this notion that cacs consciously designed "super slaves" (chris rocks term since he was positing the same theory) something that you mentioned

1. I didn't mention Chris Rock
2. I don't agree with race theories (I've said that more than once in this thread)-
I've always argued our current genealogy being the result of selective breeding and the genocide of slavery and the slave trade.

At BEST they forced slaves to reproduce and took whatever basically healthy ones they could get and thats it.

your own posts have already proven you wrong... you posted the account of a consistent effort to weed out unprofitable bloodlines

that statement discounts and hand waves all the hard work, intelligence and dedication that black athletes put into their lives and endeavors. If you look at the statement another way what it says is that if it weren't for the machinations of white men, todays black athletes and black americans period wouldn't be able to achieve what they have done in the last 100 years.

That doesn't seem like an indictment and they certainly don't take it as one.

please re-read my previous responses in this post

 

[ShortyCumStain]

Interesting discourse.

 

[geechiedan]

ok - just checking....

To be clear - I'm never arguing that genetics trumps free will, individuality, imagination, self discipline or determination...

My argument concerns only (for better or worse) the concentration of dominant traits in our physiology that isn't common in any other population.
Those traits allow us to recuperate from injuries faster, and generally we are more resilient and athletic -but no matter how great your talent nothing comes without hard work.

doesn't matter what you mean..thats what jimmy the greek meant and he had a bigger platform than you. Thats how its perceived in general. NO ONE is going to take the time to try to nuance this shit and no one cares to. When blacks excel at some physical endeavor the EXCUSE cacs and non blacks use to soothe their egos is of course they won they were bred for this shit like animals what do you expect.
In fact its because of that thinking that non blacks are always kinda surprised when they see blacks excel at intellectual and critical thinking endeavours because animals aren't suppose to do that. So no matter how much you try to explain in clinical terms what went down the only take away people in general will get from it is that blacks are the BENEFICIARIES of white mens will. This is why they can say with with full belief that Africa is a diseased filled cesspool and american blacks were better off in slavery in the US. And thats not statements from assholes in comment sections of face book thats politicians and well known pundits making those statements..again people with a bigger platform and more influence than you.

Once you go down the "blacks were bred to do..." road its never going to end well.

In this one paragraph you contradict yourself and show that you know little to nothing of the trades I mentioned... belittling what you don't understand, but ending with "there is no insult to that".
Farming is a skill but is not considered a craft / or skilled trade, so for purposes of this discussion I did not include it, nor will I. Masonry, carpentry, smithing, tanning, tailor, etc... but I'll focus on carpentry and smithing because I know the most about those 2.
Most slaves that came across had agricultural and artisan skillsets most did not have the above skills before crossing - and as I mentioned before even if a slave was a carpenter or blacksmith in western Africa they required much further training in the Americas... A blacksmith is not only making horse shoes and shoeing or crafting tools... It is creating alloys and steel and crafting tools and other items from design plans or models - It requires constant analasis and a through knowledge of metal properties, metal work - I wouldn't call it repetitive... especially if apprenticed to a master blacksmith
A journeyman carpenter is a skilled builder- that works with geometry... a master carpenter was pretty much a structural engineer -thinks in terms of load energy and material strength of all woods, able to design and build structures using different woods and even knew how to incorporate or account for masonry. Also a furniture designer. Again not repetitive or simple

Like I said before both of these take over 1o years of long days to master... And in those days they really had to improvise around shortages and be inventive on how to make changes. Do you have any idea how many patents were filed by slave owners thanks to a slave's ingenuity? (think cotton gin)

I won't even bother to school you on how much mental agility pattern recognition and acuity it takes to play on an elite level in the NBA ...

nothing i said was belittling..but your condescending tone definitely is..and its unnecessary.

Unless slaves were working with elements and materials unseen on earth..they were working with various types of wood and metals..repeatedly. Its the only way they would have knowledge and understanding enough to think outside the box and invent things. As far as Curry is concerned I said: There is a science and intelligence steph curry brings to his job but a large aspect of why he does what he does so well is because he does it all the fucking time. The fact that you mention pattern recognition shows a level of repetition happening in the game. Now stop being nitpicking and unnecessarily argumentative.

It makes no sense to you because you lack knowledge and perspective -
dude -using your logic anyone born developmentally retarded or with giantisim or a host of other congenital disorders is considered healthy

you said they were looking for size strength and fertility..specific things ..I said they were looking for healthy individuals period.


now if you can't respond without condescension then don't bother to..we're done here.

 

[ViCiouS]

you said they were looking for size strength and fertility..I said they were looking for healthy individuals period.

If they were only only looking for healthy individuals -why did they systematically castrate healthy 15y/o men that didn't physically meet the slave owners' physical standards?

Unless slaves were working with elements and materials unseen on earth..they were working with various types of wood and metals..repeatedly. Its the only way they would have knowledge and understanding enough to think outside the box and invent things. As far as Curry is concerned I said: There is a science and intelligence steph curry brings to his job but a large aspect of why he does what he does so well is because he does it all the fucking time. The fact that you mention pattern recognition shows a level of repetition happening in the game. Now stop being nitpicking and unnecessarily argumentative

forging steel copper alloys smelting iron for different and sometimes new applications is not easy and at an advanced level requires significant skill and knowledge and analysis... same goes for carpentry.
Curry or anyone else that excels in any field doesn't do it by doing the "samething" - its relentless study and practice applying what they have learned - they excel by constantly learning and then pushing themselves past their self perceived limitations not making "repetitive" circles like you've been describing - or is the issue here just semantics?

nothing i said was belittling..but your condescending tone definitely is..and its unnecessary.

you arrogantly dismiss what you don't understand- you don't know what goes into those trades but even in your last post you
are quick to dismiss the intelligence and skill required to master them - like many other things they require continual self and peer education to master and beyond...
In one post you even inferred that advanced degree'd multitasking jobs/ skills are more worthy of respect intellectually....

doesn't matter what you mean..thats what jimmy the greek meant and he had a bigger platform than you. Thats how its perceived in general. NO ONE is going to take the time to try to nuance this shit and no one cares to. When blacks excel at some physical endeavor the EXCUSE cacs and non blacks use to soothe their egos is of course they won they were bred for this shit like animals what do you expect.
In fact its because of that thinking that non blacks are always kinda surprised when they see blacks excel at intellectual and critical thinking endeavours because animals aren't suppose to do that.

Fuck what they think or say - 99% of them are sheep... wallowing in insecurity, hiding under their blankets of prejudice while clutching pillows of ignorance.

power is taken, never given

 

[geechiedan]

If they were only only looking for healthy individuals -why did they systematically castrate 15y/o men that didn't physically meet the slave owners' physical standards?

because they were morons.

forging steel copper alloys smelting iron for different and sometimes new applications is not easy and at an advanced level requires significant skill and knowledge and analysis... same goes for carpentry.
Curry or anyone else that excels in any field doesn't do it by doing the "samething" - its relentless study and practice applying what they have learned - they excel by constantly learning and then pushing themselves past their self perceived limitations not making "repetitive" circles like you've been describing - or is the issue here just semantics?

you arrogantly dismiss what you don't understand- you don't know what goes into those trades but even in your last post you
are quick to dismiss the intelligence and skill required to master them - like many other things they require continual self and peer education to master and beyond...
In one post you even inferred that advanced degree'd multitasking jobs/ skills are more worthy of respect intellectually....

who the hell is a race car driver/brain surgeon etc.. the point I was making was clear and not an insult the problem is on your end. I never described anyone making repetitive circles and I never dismissed anyone accomplishments. the PROCESS of learning ANYTHING or about anything is to do it over and over again period..I was going to say its not rocket science or brain surgery but those things actually take repeating practice as well.

here's a question when the process of forging steel copper alloys and smelting iron for different applications..did they only do it once or more than once? Don't need a dissertation its a yes they did it more than once or no they didn't answer.
here's a break down of currys shooting ability

:30 seconds..."with virtually no wasted motion his jumper is efficient and REPEATABLE." did he dismiss steph curry's abilities??

Fuck what they think or say - 99% of them are sheep... wallowing in insecurity, hiding under their blankets of prejudice while clutching pillows of ignorance.

power is taken, never given

well until you get a platform to disseminate your point of view to millions at a time..its the other way.

 

[ViCiouS]

well until you get a platform to disseminate your point of view to millions at a time..its the other way.

history has thought the lesson repeatedly that its the only way...

because they were morons.

so you refuse to acknowledge the contradictions in your own argument...

here's a question when the process of forging steel copper alloys and smelting iron for different applications..did they only do it once or more than once?

here is a question back at you - does a surgeon (ortho oncology neuro etc) perform procedures with no regard to patient's history, current condition, and anatomical differences? Or does he analyze and adapt a plan and tap in knowledge bases and the experience of peers and mentors before hand - while still being prepared to adapt and improvise when faced with anomalies and / or the unexpected - every time ?

:30 seconds..."with virtually no wasted motion his jumper is efficient and REPEATABLE." did he dismiss steph curry's abilities??

thats only one facet of his game - but you and the media point to it like that or his handle or his footwork and vision is all he is... even without some of those tools Curry would still be a great guard because of his knowledge of the game and opponents that he never stops studying or adapting to (bball iq)

 

[geechiedan]

history has thought the lesson repeatedly that its the only way...

yep...the way of the victor with the bigger weapon. they get to control how history is disseminated.

so you refuse to acknowledge the contradictions in your own argument...

you refuse to acknowledge that what your talking about doesn't change perceptions of black people it just reinforces negative stereotypes. The second you say "blacks were bred to..." you preclude and negate any self determination, will and hard work it took to achieve that thing. Because animals bred to do something don't get to choose what it is they do they only do that thing theyre DESIGNED for. Also what that statement says is if it weren't for white men doing selective breeding there wouldn't be a michael jordan or usain bolt or steph curry. Which means all of those people's accomplishments are direct offshoots of the intervention of white men. Because if they hadn't created the atlantic slave trade Blacks would still be in Africa...you know that dirty backward COUNTRY. So rather than indict them you should be THANKING them for what they did since its clearly to your benefit.

Dude its so easy to twist that shit up its not even funny.

here is a question back at you - does a surgeon (ortho oncology neuro etc) perform procedures with no regard to patient's history, current condition, and anatomical differences? Or does he analyze and adapt a plan and tap in knowledge bases and the experience of peers and mentors before hand - while still being prepared to adapt and improvise when faced with anomalies and / or the unexpected - every time ?

thats only one facet of his game - but you and the media point to it like that or his handle or his footwork and vision is all he is... even without some of those tools Curry would still be a great guard because of his knowledge of the game and opponents that he never stops studying or adapting to (bball iq)

answer: the ONLY why they would able to improvise, adapt and face anomalies is because they are familiar with the materials enough that they can deal with the unexpected and have a decent understanding of it to proceed in such case. The ONLY way to get familiar with anything is by repeated exposure to it. Its the same reason curry is as great as he is. But you know this already thats why you didnt answer my question.

 

[ViCiouS]

you refuse to acknowledge that what your talking about doesn't change perceptions of black people it just reinforces negative stereotypes.

how is this relevant? we're debating facts not stereotypes - Dude - the title of this thread is "hidden history: slave breeding in the US..."

...Its the same reason curry is as great as he is. But you know this already thats why you didnt answer my question.

ok it is semantics- and you're still over simplifying

 

[Confucius]

how is this relevant? we're debating facts not stereotypes - Dude - the title of this thread is "hidden history: slave breeding in the US..."

ok it is semantics- and you're still over simplifying

that is pretty much what he has been doing the entire time debating stereotypes instead of facts and over simplifying the issue. This dude is using steph curry as his prime example. What does his shooting motion have to do with the discussion, muscle memory, or fast twitch fibras. His muscle memory is more of a neurological strength if you want to be real.

 

[geechiedan]

how is this relevant? we're debating facts not stereotypes - Dude - the title of this thread is "hidden history: slave breeding in the US..."

ok it is semantics- and you're still over simplifying

and these facts are supposed to do what exactly? what don't we already know.. slavery happened and slaves where forces to reproduce....now what?