Parenting styles and what's most successful

[Boilermaker03]

Well this is very interesting.

Parenting Is the Key to Adolescent Mental Health

After a decade of surging adolescent mental health problems and suicide, the nation’s leading public health authorities have declared an emergency. Unfortunately, the solutions proposed by organizations like the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics—such as increased funding for diagnostic...

ifstudies.org

 

[Boiler Buck]

Well this is very interesting.

Parenting Is the Key to Adolescent Mental Health

After a decade of surging adolescent mental health problems and suicide, the nation’s leading public health authorities have declared an emergency. Unfortunately, the solutions proposed by organizations like the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics—such as increased funding for diagnostic...

ifstudies.org

Rules & discipline......who would have thought??

 

[SKYDOG]

Rules & discipline......who would have thought??

Kids crave for discipline. The more you give them the happier overall they become with some reason.

Just like coaching, the harder you coach ‘‘em the more respect they have for you and the game. Bobby Knight acted like an arse, but coached his players hard. Most all his players had the best to say about him years later.

 

[BNIBoiler]

Kids crave for discipline. The more you give them the happier overall they become with some reason.

Just like coaching, the harder you coach ‘‘em the more respect they have for you and the game. Bobby Knight acted like an arse, but coached his players hard. Most all his players had the best to say about him years later.

Yeah, if you like to be choked, head butted, or kicked on the shin.

 

[Boiler Buck]

Kids crave for discipline. The more you give them the happier overall they become with some reason.

Likely why there are more problem children originating from single parent households. Less parent time and involvement.

There are great kids from all kinds of family structures, but children from single parent families are incarcerated at triple the rate. I imagine less parent/child interaction including less discipline and rules are part of this.

 

[Boilermaker03]

Likely why there are more problem children originating from single parent households. Less parent time and involvement.

Reminds me of a Chris Rock skit where he talks about single parenthood. He said: "yeah you can do it, but that doesn't mean it's to be done!"

 

[bonefish1]

The bleeding heart liberals have decided it's better to be your kid's friend than parent. Children are to be given the freedom to make their own decisions over what gender they feel like playing, what crazy color they can dye their hair, and if you're a white child, that you're an oppressor.

 

[BNIBoiler]

The bleeding heart liberals have decided it's better to be your kid's friend than parent. Children are to be given the freedom to make their own decisions over what gender they feel like playing, what crazy color they can dye their hair, and if you're a white child, that you're an oppressor.

You need to quit with the white child an oppressor BS. Now who's playing the victim card now? Teaching the true and bad things in US history is not telling white kids that they are the oppressors. It's called history. Something that you obviously slept through history class and know nothing about. If y'all don't want your kids to learn about the horrible stuff, then white folks should not have done horrible things to other human beings like slavery. The "Trail of Tears" with Native Americans. The Japanese internment camps during WWII. Jim Crow, lynchings. Anti-semitism, and everything else in between.

 

[Boilermaker03]

You need to quit with the white child an oppressor BS. Now who's playing the victim card now? Teaching the true and bad things in US history is not telling white kids that they are the oppressors. It's called history. Something that you obviously slept through history class and know nothing about. If y'all don't want your kids to learn about the horrible stuff, then white folks should not have done horrible things to other human beings like slavery. The "Trail of Tears" with Native Americans. The Japanese internment camps during WWII. Jim Crow, lynchings. Anti-semitism, and everything else in between.

You need to stop being completely wrong of facts.

BTW, all of these terrible things weren't done by white people. They were done by Democrats.

azcentral.com and The Arizona Republic: Phoenix and Arizona news

arizona's home page: azcentral.com is the digital home of The Arizona Republic newspaper, with breaking news and in-depth coverage of sports, things to do, travel and opinions.

www.azcentral.com

Elite K-8 school teaches white students they’re born racist

An elite Manhattan school is teaching white students as young as 6 that they’re born racist and should feel guilty benefiting from “white privilege,” while heaping praise and cupcakes on their blac…

nypost.com

Loading…

www.reuters.com

 

[bonefish1]

You need to quit with the white child an oppressor BS. Now who's playing the victim card now? Teaching the true and bad things in US history is not telling white kids that they are the oppressors. It's called history. Something that you obviously slept through history class and know nothing about. If y'all don't want your kids to learn about the horrible stuff, then white folks should not have done horrible things to other human beings like slavery. The "Trail of Tears" with Native Americans. The Japanese internment camps during WWII. Jim Crow, lynchings. Anti-semitism, and everything else in between.

When they’re teaching about slavery, do they actually go back to the point of how the black Africans actually got on the slave ships? Do they teach that blacks were bought and sold to the white Europeans by other blacks? I doubt they focus on this little important part of history.

Also, do they teach about the uncomfortable truth that thousands of slaves in the US were owned by…..free blacks? They probably skim over this part as well.

Remind me again why white people shouldn’t be doing all these horrible things….seems like blacks were doing some pretty horrible things as well.

Black Masters; The Ownership of Slaves by Free People of Color in the Antebellum South 1780-1861

Black Master. It is difficult to digest, but numerous records indicate that thousands of free people of color in the antebellum South did in fact own slaves. Not only did they own slaves but, in some instances, they harshly disciplined and sold their slaves. In other instances, they treated them...

scholarworks.umb.edu

 

[BNIBoiler]

You need to stop being completely wrong of facts.

BTW, all of these terrible things weren't done by white people. They were done by Democrats.

azcentral.com and The Arizona Republic: Phoenix and Arizona news

arizona's home page: azcentral.com is the digital home of The Arizona Republic newspaper, with breaking news and in-depth coverage of sports, things to do, travel and opinions.

www.azcentral.com

Elite K-8 school teaches white students they’re born racist

An elite Manhattan school is teaching white students as young as 6 that they’re born racist and should feel guilty benefiting from “white privilege,” while heaping praise and cupcakes on their blac…

nypost.com

Loading…

www.reuters.com

Democrats this, democrats that. You are sure obsessed with democrats. Does it even matter. Most people were racist back then whether they were democrat or republican. This includes President Lincoln the so called great emancipator who did not free n’er slave.

 

[BNIBoiler]

When they’re teaching about slavery, do they actually go back to the point of how the black Africans actually got on the slave ships? Do they teach that blacks were bought and sold to the white Europeans by other blacks? I doubt they focus on this little important part of history.

Also, do they teach about the uncomfortable truth that thousands of slaves in the US were owned by…..free blacks? They probably skim over this part as well.

Remind me again why white people shouldn’t be doing all these horrible things….seems like blacks were doing some pretty horrible things as well.

Black Masters; The Ownership of Slaves by Free People of Color in the Antebellum South 1780-1861

Black Master. It is difficult to digest, but numerous records indicate that thousands of free people of color in the antebellum South did in fact own slaves. Not only did they own slaves but, in some instances, they harshly disciplined and sold their slaves. In other instances, they treated them...

scholarworks.umb.edu

There go again and right on queue. You maximize the minimum or minimize the maximum. Out of all of the many slave holders in the US at that time, you want to focus on the few black slaveholders who owned 0.007% of the total slaves. Since you like black slave holders, I’ll tell about the Natchez Barber. A black dude in Natchez, MS that owned a barbershop in town. He owned about a dozen slaves.

Anyhow, the Africans that sold their prisoners of war to the European and US slave trade did hold a gun to their heads and forced them to buy the Africans and sell them to the slaveholders back in the US. They didn’t hold a gun to the heads of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and others to purchase these human beings.

What you just did is the typical deflection of many right wingers that do not want to admit any of the wrong doings white folks did in this country. Then don’t want your kids to learn about it in school. But don’t mind when blacks learn on school about what happen to our own ancestors. You do this everytime this discussion comes up and it’s sad.

 

[Boilermaker03]

Democrats this, democrats that. You are sure obsessed with democrats. Does it even matter. Most people were racist back then whether they were democrat or republican. This includes President Lincoln the so called great emancipator who did not free n’er slave.

Yes it does matter. Because only one side acted on that racism and the other side did something about it. But you just keep believing in the BS narratives that your former (and current) en slavers keep telling you. They wouldn't lie to you, right?

 

[BNIBoiler]

Yes it does matter. Because only one side acted on that racism and the other side did something about it.

Oh please elaborate.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

There go again and right on queue. You maximize the minimum or minimize the maximum. Out of all of the many slave holders in the US at that time, you want to focus on the few black slaveholders who owned 0.007% of the total slaves. Since you like black slave holders, I’ll tell about the Natchez Barber. A black dude in Natchez, MS that owned a barbershop in town. He owned about a dozen slaves.

Anyhow, the Africans that sold their prisoners of war to the European and US slave trade did hold a gun to their heads and forced them to buy the Africans and sell them to the slaveholders back in the US. They didn’t hold a gun to the heads of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and others to purchase these human beings.

What you just did is the typical deflection of many right wingers that do not want to admit any of the wrong doings white folks did in this country. Then don’t want your kids to learn about it in school. But don’t mind when blacks learn on school about what happen to our own ancestors. You do this everytime this discussion comes up and it’s sad.

Blacks and whites alike are guilty of slavery, like our VPs family.

 

[BNIBoiler]

Blacks and whites alike are guilty of slavery, like our VPs family.

Y’all are something else. That is one of the most ignorant statements I’ve heard on this board, and there’s been quite a few. I see why y’all don’t want history taught to your kids in schools. That’s a shame.

 

[Boiler Buck]

This includes President Lincoln the so called great emancipator who did not free n’er slave.

Always entertaining with you....

But haven't heard this one yet so please elaborate?

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Y’all are something else. That is one of the most ignorant statements I’ve heard on this board, and there’s been quite a few. I see why y’all don’t want history taught to your kids in schools. That’s a shame.

Sorry that the facts bother you.

 

[bonefish1]

There go again and right on queue. You maximize the minimum or minimize the maximum. Out of all of the many slave holders in the US at that time, you want to focus on the few black slaveholders who owned 0.007% of the total slaves. Since you like black slave holders, I’ll tell about the Natchez Barber. A black dude in Natchez, MS that owned a barbershop in town. He owned about a dozen slaves.

Anyhow, the Africans that sold their prisoners of war to the European and US slave trade did hold a gun to their heads and forced them to buy the Africans and sell them to the slaveholders back in the US. They didn’t hold a gun to the heads of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and others to purchase these human beings.

What you just did is the typical deflection of many right wingers that do not want to admit any of the wrong doings white folks did in this country. Then don’t want your kids to learn about it in school. But don’t mind when blacks learn on school about what happen to our own ancestors. You do this everytime this discussion comes up and it’s sad.

I only do this because people don't know the historical or cultural significance of the whole story of the slave trade. There are some absolute uncomfortable truths that need to be part of the entire discussion.
And what you just did is typical of lefty libs, who like to pick and choose their historical facts. You can't conveniently skim over some really important parts of history and the process because it doesn't fit the narrative.

Yes, slavery was horrible, but it wasn't just the white guy guilty of the atrocities.

It's just like the George Floyd situation:
You would say "George Floyd was murdered by a racist white cop." No context, end of story.

Whereas, I would say, "George Floyd was a 5 time violent felon, high on drugs, violently resisting arrest, in the process of committing a crime, who would not comply with police orders and therefore, needed to be restrained. Had Floyd decided to be a law abiding citizen, not do drugs, and not fought the cops, like the 99% of us, he wouldn't have been in that situation in the first place."

 

[bonefish1]

Y’all are something else. That is one of the most ignorant statements I’ve heard on this board, and there’s been quite a few. I see why y’all don’t want history taught to your kids in schools. That’s a shame.

Sometimes, the truth hurts. Do you think many lefty libs know that Harris' family were slave owners?

 

[SIBoiler2]

Once again a legitimate topic re: parenting styles gets hijacked by a bitter individual with a never-ending rant about racism, slavery and woe-is-meism.
The lack of discipline and accountability by parents is a major cause of the issues in our country today.
Our current president is a limp-wristed, permissive parent. His threats of "Don't" with no threat behind them have been ignored by the entire world. World leaders, much like our children, respect other world leaders when they know that ignoring threats have negative consequences. Look no farther than Hunter to see what kind of a parent Joey Biden has been.

 

[BNIBoiler]

Always entertaining with you....

But haven't heard this one yet so please elaborate?

Well as long as y'all keep suppressing history, you won't hear it. Particularly if you fall asleep in history class like the Boneman.

In 1863, President Lincoln did not free the slaves like everyone thinks with the Emancipation Proclamation. The EP was actually a military document that allowed slaves in the South to fight for the North because during that time the North was facing large losses and the Union needed men to fight. The slaves in the northern states remained enslaved.

Lincoln even toyed with the idea of sending the slaves to Latin America or the Caribbean.

The bottom line is that Lincoln was far from an abolitionist.

 

[BNIBoiler]

I only do this because people don't know the historical or cultural significance of the whole story of the slave trade. There are some absolute uncomfortable truths that need to be part of the entire discussion.
And what you just did is typical of lefty libs, who like to pick and choose their historical facts. You can't conveniently skim over some really important parts of history and the process because it doesn't fit the narrative.

You are right, people do not know the whole story of the slave trade. However, you always bring up the Africans selling their prisoners of war to the white slave traders as if to downplay the role the US played in it. It's not a secret that they bought the slaves from Africans. This was even a side plot in a recent Hollywood movie, "The Woman King".

 

[BNIBoiler]

Sometimes, the truth hurts. Do you think many lefty libs know that Harris' family were slave owners?

Again, you always bring this up when you want to downplay something. Do you think the lefty libs care that the Harris’ family were slave owners? Why would anyone care? Why is the a big deal to you? A lot of people have ancestors that owned slaves. I may have. You may have. As far as Harris. Her great-great-great grandfather was white Irishman than lived in Jamaica in the 1800s that owned slaves. Just like the US, slavery was part of the Caribbean and Latin America. You and Faux News always brought this up as to somehow discredits her. Y’all better look more closely at your own family tree. You never know what you find as a lot of people found out on the PBS show “Finding Your Roots”. Hosted by Dr. Henry Louis Gates.

 

[Boiler Buck]

Well as long as y'all keep suppressing history, you won't hear it. Particularly if you fall asleep in history class like the Boneman.

In 1863, President Lincoln did not free the slaves like everyone thinks with the Emancipation Proclamation. The EP was actually a military document that allowed slaves in the South to fight for the North because during that time the North was facing large losses and the Union needed men to fight. The slaves in the northern states remained enslaved.

Lincoln even toyed with the idea of sending the slaves to Latin America or the Caribbean.

The bottom line is that Lincoln was far from an abolitionist.

Love the way you twist History to suit your race centric agenda. It is really quite remarkable.

Words from the E Proclamation ....

"all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom......And by virtue of the power, and for the purpose aforesaid, I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within said designated States, and parts of States, are, and henceforward shall be free; and that the Executive government of the United States, including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of said persons."

You might not know what a CATALYST is?? But it is something that makes a reaction GO. While the EP did not perfectly end slavery, it is quite a twist on history to say it (ie Lincoln) had no effect as it was the catalyst to make ALL men free and equal. Quit trying to downplay the greatness of Lincoln.

 

[roninindy]

Well as long as y'all keep suppressing history, you won't hear it. Particularly if you fall asleep in history class like the Boneman.

In 1863, President Lincoln did not free the slaves like everyone thinks with the Emancipation Proclamation. The EP was actually a military document that allowed slaves in the South to fight for the North because during that time the North was facing large losses and the Union needed men to fight. The slaves in the northern states remained enslaved.

Lincoln even toyed with the idea of sending the slaves to Latin America or the Caribbean.

The bottom line is that Lincoln was far from an abolitionist.

Yeah, I remember reading somewhere that Lincoln thought that black people would never adapt to American culture and would be better off if helped back to Afrika. In fact by most measures black people were doing very well in many ways in early 60s and before, with good graduation rates and positive indicators in other areas. What was different starting later in the 60s, the start of breaking up intact black families, with "the war on poverty." It is pretty widely accepted that children benefit from structure growing up. Children deal with more anxiety and fears than adults recognize and they can thrive better when parents provide structure and set good boundaries. Not necessarily bobby knight structure ha ha. Who does a female child use as a model for her later choice as a partner. Who does an anxious young boy use as a model for a grown up? How does a young boy end up if his single mom is overwhelmed and unable to provide the needed structure? Not so long ago a very talented black guard from Purdue was asked by a member of the press how it came about that he was able to succeed despite all the obstacles he faced. He said it was his mom, she had ruled with an iron fist but still provided the unconditional love they also needed.

 

[BNIBoiler]

Love the way you twist History to suit your race centric agenda. It is really quite remarkable.

Words from the E Proclamation ....

"all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom......And by virtue of the power, and for the purpose aforesaid, I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within said designated States, and parts of States, are, and henceforward shall be free; and that the Executive government of the United States, including the military and naval authorities thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of said persons."

You might not know what a CATALYST is?? But it is something that makes a reaction GO. While the EP did not perfectly end slavery, it is quite a twist on history to say it (ie Lincoln) had no effect as it was the catalyst to make ALL men free and equal. Quit trying to downplay the greatness of Lincoln.

I’m not downplaying anything, I’m just clearing the air that Lincoln was not the great so called Republican abolitionist as y’all make him out to be. You and the Boneman must have cut history class together. Why weren’t the slaves in the northern states set free if he was such an emancipator. Now that fact is certainly indisputable. I’m telling you, the EP only allowed the slaves from the southern states to have an opportunity to fight for the Union. That’s it. Research it yourself. Watch some documentaries. You may learn something.

President Lincoln was not who y’all thought he was.

5 Things You May Not Know About Abraham Lincoln, Slavery and Emancipation | HISTORY

The 16th U.S. president was firm in believing slavery was morally wrong, but his views on racial equality were sometimes more complicated.

www.history.com

 

[Boiler Buck]

I’m not downplaying anything, I’m just clearing the air that Lincoln was not the great so called Republican abolitionist as y’all make him out to be. You and the Boneman must have cut history class together. Why weren’t the slaves in the northern states set free if he was such an emancipator. Now that fact is certainly indisputable. I’m telling you, the EP only allowed the slaves from the southern states to have an opportunity to fight for the Union. That’s it. Research it yourself. Watch some documentaries. You may learn something.

President Lincoln was not who y’all thought he was.

5 Things You May Not Know About Abraham Lincoln, Slavery and Emancipation | HISTORY

The 16th U.S. president was firm in believing slavery was morally wrong, but his views on racial equality were sometimes more complicated.

www.history.com

Already said it did not perfectly free the slaves.....which in your zeal you overlooked. So on that point ONLY we agree. I have already read everything you post including this diatribe about Lincoln.

But missing the Catalyst effect of the EP is something you are missing or at the least downplaying.

But Merry Christmas to you BNI and yours. Praise Jesus above all. Peace be with you sir.

 

[BNIBoiler]

Already said it did not perfectly free the slaves.....which in your zeal you overlooked. So on that point ONLY we agree. I have already read everything you post including this diatribe about Lincoln.

But missing the Catalyst effect of the EP is something you are missing or at the least downplaying.

But Merry Christmas to you BNI and yours. Praise Jesus above all. Peace be with you sir.

Thanks and Merry Christmas you and your family also.

 

[bonefish1]

You are right, people do not know the whole story of the slave trade. However, you always bring up the Africans selling their prisoners of war to the white slave traders as if to downplay the role the US played in it. It's not a secret that they bought the slaves from Africans. This was even a side plot in a recent Hollywood movie, "The Woman King".

And why do you not think people know the whole history of the slave trade? Perhaps some of the uncomfortable facts are not addressed by the liberal educational system because it doesn’t fit the narrative?

But it is an interesting circle:
Black man captures and sells black man to white man.
White man enslaves black man.
White man frees some black men.
Free Black man buys and enslaves black man.

I mean, it’s uncomfortable to think this was part of slavery history, but it’s factually accurate.

 

[bonefish1]

Thanks and Merry Christmas you and your family also.

Merry Christmas to you and yours BNI. Hope you’re spending time with friends and loved ones.

 

[BNIBoiler]

Merry Christmas to you and yours BNI. Hope you’re spending time with friends and loved ones.

Merry Christmas to you and your family also.

 

[BNIBoiler]

And why do you not think people know the whole history of the slave trade? Perhaps some of the uncomfortable facts are not addressed by the liberal educational system because it doesn’t fit the narrative?

But it is an interesting circle:
Black man captures and sells black man to white man.
White man enslaves black man.
White man frees some black men.
Free Black man buys and enslaves black man.

I mean, it’s uncomfortable to think this was part of slavery history, but it’s factually accurate.

You always seem to think there is some liberal agenda for something. If anything, currently there is a right wing agenda to suppress history books of stuff that they think make little white kids feel bad about themselves.

People do not know the whole story because they don’t bother to read and learn for themselves. Or take an advance history class in college. I learned about the Africans selling their prisoners of war to the slave traders back in the 80s while taking a black studies course at Purdue. So no one is purposely hiding that fact. Similarly with the so called Lincoln Emancipation Proclamation. In K-12 we were taught that it freed the slaves. However after further research, the EP did not free any slave. There is no agenda. Just that history books, particularly in K-12, have only so much to cover.

 

[Riveting-]

You always seem to think there is some liberal agenda for something. If anything, currently there is a right wing agenda to suppress history books of stuff that they think make little white kids feel bad about themselves.

People do not know the whole story because they don’t bother to read and learn for themselves. Or take an advance history class in college. I learned about the Africans selling their prisoners of war to the slave traders back in the 80s while taking a black studies course at Purdue. So no one is purposely hiding that fact. Similarly with the so called Lincoln Emancipation Proclamation. In K-12 we were taught that it freed the slaves. However after further research, the EP did not free any slave. There is no agenda. Just that history books, particularly in K-12, have only so much to cover.

While you are on the topic, what was your major at Purdue?

 

[Boilermaker03]

Oh please elaborate.

Democrats enslaved black people, committed genocide vs the native Indians and practiced Eugenics. Republicans fought a war to end slavery and has been fighting for equal rights ever since.

 

[Boilermaker03]

Well as long as y'all keep suppressing history, you won't hear it. Particularly if you fall asleep in history class like the Boneman.

In 1863, President Lincoln did not free the slaves like everyone thinks with the Emancipation Proclamation. The EP was actually a military document that allowed slaves in the South to fight for the North because during that time the North was facing large losses and the Union needed men to fight. The slaves in the northern states remained enslaved.

Lincoln even toyed with the idea of sending the slaves to Latin America or the Caribbean.

The bottom line is that Lincoln was far from an abolitionist.

First of all, nobody is suppressing history. They are suppressing fake history like 1619.

Second, what was the war fought over? I thought it was you that was trying to argue that the war was fought over slavery and only slavery. When others tried to bring up that there were other reasons for Southerners for example to fight in the war, you tried to say that they were wrong.

Yes, the Emancipation Proclamation was to bring in blacks to the Union army. But again, the reason for the war in the first place is important, is it not?

Lincoln didn't want slavery, but he knew the issue would divide the country and he was more concerned about keeping the Union together.

 

[Boilermaker03]

I’m not downplaying anything, I’m just clearing the air that Lincoln was not the great so called Republican abolitionist as y’all make him out to be. You and the Boneman must have cut history class together. Why weren’t the slaves in the northern states set free if he was such an emancipator. Now that fact is certainly indisputable. I’m telling you, the EP only allowed the slaves from the southern states to have an opportunity to fight for the Union. That’s it. Research it yourself. Watch some documentaries. You may learn something.

President Lincoln was not who y’all thought he was.

5 Things You May Not Know About Abraham Lincoln, Slavery and Emancipation | HISTORY

The 16th U.S. president was firm in believing slavery was morally wrong, but his views on racial equality were sometimes more complicated.

www.history.com

I have to seriously question the knowledge of someone writing that article when they demonstrate that they may not understand the three fifths compromise.

 

[Boilermaker03]

And why do you not think people know the whole history of the slave trade? Perhaps some of the uncomfortable facts are not addressed by the liberal educational system because it doesn’t fit the narrative?

But it is an interesting circle:
Black man captures and sells black man to white man.
White man enslaves black man.
White man frees some black men.
Free Black man buys and enslaves black man.

I mean, it’s uncomfortable to think this was part of slavery history, but it’s factually accurate.

The very first person to own slaves in America was a black man.

 

[Boilermaker03]

You always seem to think there is some liberal agenda for something. If anything, currently there is a right wing agenda to suppress history books of stuff that they think make little white kids feel bad about themselves.

People do not know the whole story because they don’t bother to read and learn for themselves. Or take an advance history class in college. I learned about the Africans selling their prisoners of war to the slave traders back in the 80s while taking a black studies course at Purdue. So no one is purposely hiding that fact. Similarly with the so called Lincoln Emancipation Proclamation. In K-12 we were taught that it freed the slaves. However after further research, the EP did not free any slave. There is no agenda. Just that history books, particularly in K-12, have only so much to cover.

That is just objectively false as you can read from the excerpts taken from the EP linked above.

 

[BNIBoiler]

The very first person to own slaves in America was a black man.

Hugh Gwynn was not a black man. Gwynn was a white dude that owned John Punch after he tried to escape his indentured servitude in the 1640s. His indentured servitude change to servitude for life. The dude you are most likely talking about was Anthony Johnson. A former indentured servant himself that somehow was able to by his freedom and acquired land and indentured servants of his own. In the 1650s, Johnson’s indentured servant, John Casor due to a lawsuit became Johnson’s servant for life.