This STUPID Dumba$$ Meme Came Across My Facebook Feed Recently

Scrolling through my Facebook feed yesterday I came across this meme that showed a picture of dead civil war soldiers and said:

Over 620,000 white people died to free black slaves and still to this day not even one thank you.

Here is the meme:

This meme was posted by an acquaintance of mine who is a white southern American with a typical public high school education level. Not being one to pass up a good debunking of bullshit, I, of course, dove right in, keyboard first. Here is my response:

I think you missed the part about white people being the ones that enslaved the black people in the first place. Yes, I know the first official slave owner in the US was a black man. You are missing the point. Over 99.5% of all the slaves (multiple MILLIONS of people) in the US over the 200 year period where slavery was legal, were owned by white people. So you can yell all you want about the first slave owner being a black man, and you can yell all you want about the 2,000 or so (out of MILLIONS) of slaves that were also later owned by other black people. None of that changes the FACT that slavery was a distinctly white practice perpetrated upon black people. Slavery in America was a white institution and regardless of who started it and why and how and how many black people owned other black people it was a distinctly white practice. And that practice of slavery coupled with the despicable thoroughly scientifically debunked and disproven, biblical, bullshit, idea of black people being the descendants of Cain the Cursed, Slayer of Abel. (The FACTS of the matter are that ALL of us are direct descendants of black skinned Africans. This is indisputable FACT of genetics and to claim otherwise makes you a fucking moron, too stupid to be allowed to spread your defective genes. Go drink some bleach, your genes have a seriously strong case of stupidity infection.

This meme is like giving someone aids and then handing them the pills that treat the disease and then demanding payment for the pills you just gave them. Instead of, you know, NEVER GIVING THEM AIDS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Your perspective needs adjusting.

620,000 white people dying to just BARELY START, to correct a mistake that white people made in the first place is merely the barest hint of the beginnings of an apology and making amends for enslaving MILLIONS of black people and KILLING millions of black slaves over more than 400 years of the abominable practice of slavery that white people decided to justify using their bullshit religion and a non-existent god.

12.5 MILLION people (that’s JUST counting only the ones sent to the borders of what is CURRENTLY the US…this number IGNORES the other MILLIONS of people sent everywhere else in the world) were kidnapped from their homeland and shipped in chains in the most horrible conditions. Conditions so bad that 2 MILLION of them didn’t live to see the shores of America…and THEY were the LUCKY ones who didn’t have to spend the next decade or three of their life enslaved, beaten, starved, humiliated, and treated like cattle.

The surviving 10.7 million or so, spent the rest of their miserable lives in chains, surviving the absolute worst conditions humans can burden another with, AND were forced to bring CHILDREN into the same conditions and then watch their CHILDREN suffer the same treatment. For more than 200 years another several MILLION people were born into, and died in slavery. Their ENTIRE lives spent as a slaves to white people. Entire generations of people born into and dying in slavery.

How many died? Well 10.5 million were brought here and there was “ONLY” 4 million black slaves freed by the emancipation proclamation…so although they were reproducing as fast as they humanly could because their white master FORCED them to breed like rabbits, they had to keep importing them because they were killing them faster than they could breed them. AVERAGE number of babies per female in America in 1800? SEVEN PER MOTHER. White slavers were killing them FASTER than mothers could replace them at 7 babies per mother. Faster than they could ship them over from Africa. 62,500 Africans kidnapped and enslaved PER YEAR AVERAGE for 200 years straight (and that number is JUST the ones sent to America. Which ignores the more than 80 million calculated to have been enslaved in the Arab slave trade). And despite all that, there was ONLY 4 million slaves left alive to free after those 200 years.

That means HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of black people were slaves over that 200 year period, and you are worried about a measly 620,000 guys who died? AND you want their descendants to thank the descendants of the people who enslaved them for dying while “freeing” them after keeping them enslaved for more than 200 years. Eat shit and die you moron.

Oh yeah and a full 12% of the Union army and navy were black people who had been slaves. So of those 620,000 guys who died in the cause of emancipation, only 545,000 of them were white, so the claimed number on the meme is false anyway. And now you want to concern yourself with barely half a million white people who died freeing the slaves when hundreds of millions of blacks died as slaves?!

Yeah, your perspective is off just a bit there brother. Your white privilege is horribly, hugely, grotesquely overblown.

Black people don’t “owe” white people SHIT for “freeing” them, and it’s a fucking slap in the face to every black person in America (or anywhere in the world really) to post some bullshit like this. Not to mention an insult to the intelligence of ANY human that reads it.

At This Point Another Response Was Posted by Another Reader of the Meme as Follows:

“But stand by sir. I’m not promoting or endorsing this. But you must acknowledge how it WAS. Blacks were sold as goods. Like property to the white man. And who honestly enslaved them? Tribes fought and the losing one would be enslaved. It wasn’t the white man who entrapped or captured the tribe members. It was within themselves. And I’m nowhere saying it’s right, not whatsoever. But the white man literally traded already “enslaved” people for goods. Blankets and colorful fabric to the average pig was traded for bodies. That, sir, is a fact.

Now as far as the people who died for freedom. A lot if not most got freedom as they were brought in. A farmer can house 100 slaves for example. His farm can only feed 75. So therefore he would trade the old and weak for the newer slaves just so his farm would not go under. Morally wrong, but it makes sense at a business standpoint. And both sides fought with slaves and “free” black men. I use free loosely because they were never really free and they were partially free only after they completed their term.

Now growing up in a partially southern AND northern state, which is diluted by popular media and story books. The state I came from is and was both sides. Both north and south wanted to keep their slaves. I don’t care what you say and or what you type, post, or find. Both sides wants their slaves. But…..it was the south that did not get their workforce from the immigration. They got their immigration from slavery, and the north got theirs from mostly Irish. Neither sides could survive or flourish without slaves. White or black. Irish or American. Period the end. But I will say this. The south recognized it, and so did the north. The north promised slaves to free them, but the north had a constant flow of immigrants. And therefore could replenish their numbers. The south could not. And the south promised to do the same. And with the same breath I’ll say that the south promised this even though they knew they could not replenish their numbers.

I know you’re not from the east. But there is a lot of info I can bring to this argument or conversation that is not in the history books that has been forgotten and or tried to be erased from American knowledge. I’m no professor of history, but being right in the middle of it I can tell you a lot that has happened when it comes to this subject.”

And My Response to the Response:

The blacks who did the kidnapping and enslaving would not have been doing it if there was not a market for the “goods” they were selling…the responsibility STILL lies with the people who were doing the buying of slaves. If there is no market for a good then no one will produce that good. That is basic economics. So the slavers weren’t the root problem, it was the slave OWNERS who were the root of the problem. If there had been no slave owners then there would be no slavers. Period. End of FACTUAL sentence.

Both sides did NOT fight with slaves and free black men…that assertion is fallacious and false. There were ZERO slaves north of the Mason-Dixon line (which is what the “North” technically was at the start of the war). By 1810 ALL of the states north of the Mason-Dixon line had abolished slavery. The North ONLY used free black men or escaped slaves who VOLUNTEERED (slaves were not allowed to be used by federal law) and the South ONLY used slaves who were not volunteers and even then, the Southern states refused to let them use weapons for fear of slave revolt…so they were only used for labor.

Five states below the M-D line did not secede and stayed loyal to the union: West Virginia split from regular Virginia over the slave question and became a new state during this time, and along with Maryland, Kentucky, Delaware, and Missouri they were the only slave holding states that were not part of the rebellion. These five states were allowed to keep their slaves until the end of the war and the question of slavery was resolved by the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th Amendment. But, this was mostly irrelevant since 3 of the 5 states freed their slaves before the end of the war and before the Emancipation Proclamation anyway.

The north didn’t “want to keep” their slaves. They didn’t have any to keep. Those five SOUTHERN (below the M-D line) states decided to NOT secede but it had nothing to do with wanting to give up their slaves or being “Northern.” So that whole assertion is just flat out wrong. It DID have to do with not splitting the union and the economies of those four states and other political and economic considerations. Those five states were more closely economically linked to the North than to the South. They were already moving away from being “part of the South” well before the Civil War started. Those five states also had far fewer slaves than the other Southern states that did secede…and so had WAY less to lose (economically speaking) by freeing their slaves. Another significant factor of the decision by these five non-seceding slave holding states was concern over the way the Confederacy was setting up their military. As mentioned before, of these five states, three of them abolished slavery BEFORE the Emancipation Proclamation (Maryland, Missouri, & West Virginia) the other two (Delaware & Kentucky) didn’t until the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th Amendment. Further, a solidly southern state that had seceded (Tennessee) also officially freed their slaves before the EP.

Also, each of these five states had hardly any slaves to account for at the start of the war anyway (which is why they had nothing to gain be secession and lots to lose by seceding). In Delaware less than 2% of its population was slaves. West Virginia was barely 5%. Maryland was barely 20%. Missouri was less than 10%. Kentucky was about 23%. These five states together averaged less than 13% slaves of their total combined population.

By direct contrast, most of the southern secessionist states had over 45% slave populations and the whole confederacy averaged over 47% slave populations at the start of the war. THAT is the difference between a seceding state and a union state that still happened to have a few slaves. South Carolina was the highest slave holding state at nearly 60%. Compare that to the slave states that stayed loyal to the union…the HIGHEST was Kentucky with barely 23%. The very lowest seceding state was Tennessee which had 25%. So the LOWEST seceding state had a slave proportion almost equal to (but still higher than) the HIGHEST non-seceding state. (In fact, large numbers of pro-union forces in Tennessee almost succeeded in taking over the state at one point and switching sides. Jefferson Davis barely succeeded in putting down the counter rebellion). Like I said earlier, THAT single fact (slave population percentage) is the biggest and most significant difference between a state that seceded and one that didn’t. ANYONE that tells you that slavery is NOT the reason for the Civil War and NOT the reason for the Southern states seceding is a moron that can’t handle facts and doesn’t actually know history. Don’t believe me? Feel free to check the letters of secession that most of the seceding states sent to Congress. EVERY SINGLE ONE of them specifically mentions slavery as the most important reason or the ONLY reason for their secession. Not one of them does NOT mention slavery as the primary or only reason. Not one. Check for yourself if you don’t believe me.

As for the other points, the Irish were NEVER slaves by ANY definition…indentured laborers for four to seven years sure…hard laborers sure…shitty work conditions sure. BUT they were never owned, and never bought and sold like cattle. Not even the Chinese suffered slavery in America even though the discrimination and intolerance and racial bigotry directed at them made the discrimination directed at the Irish look like small potatoes (pun intended). There is a HUGE difference between hard labor as a paid freeman or indentured servant and hard labor as a wholly, bodily-owned, non-pay-earning, slave.

You say the North had a constant influx of immigrants and the South didn’t. You couldn’t be more wrong. They both had huge amounts of influx of immigrants. The difference is that the immigrants in the North were freemen who came by choice and the immigrants in the South were slaves who came against their own will. And then you make an interesting point: why did the North “keep” all the immigrants who came in as freemen? Why didn’t these immigrants move to the south? There is ONLY one reason, and it’s a one word answer: JOBS.

Freemen CANNOT compete with slaves in a job market and be successful. There is just too much of a cost disparity between the two types of labor. Slaves are just too cheap in comparison with wage earning workers. Incidentally, that’s why iPhones are made in China, the wage earners there are borderline slaves. American labor can’t compete. If the iPhone was made in America they would be more than $1500 EACH for the cheapest model (and as we have seen recently, not very many people want to even pay $1000 for an iPhone). Why did the immigrants to America stay in the north? Because that’s where the jobs were that weren’t utilizing slave labor. Because that’s where the jobs were that non-slaves could get paid to do. Because that’s where people pursuing the American Dream actually had a chance to maybe realize that dream. Not so, in the South, where the American dream was ONLY for the rich, white, slave-owning oligarchs.

Further, although there was lots of free immigrants coming to America and staying in the North, the numbers of free immigrants was absolutely DWARFED by the number of slaves brought into the South. During the period of time between the Revolutionary and Civil wars the North received 2.4 million immigrants. During that same time period the south received 8.4 million new African slave “immigrants.” It’s REALLY, REALLY hard to compete for jobs when the workers in the job market are all slave labor AND they outnumber you 4 to 1. Let me say that again: FOUR TIMES the number of slaves imported compared to regular free immigrants, and you wonder why the immigrants into the northern states didn’t move south.

And while we are on the topic of slave numbers, you may have noticed the discrepancy between the number of slaves who were freed at the end of the Civil War and the number of slaves brought into the country between the Revolutionary and Civil wars. If you did, you are perceptive. If 8.4 million slaves were brought in, AND they were reproducing and having babies, how come there were only 4 million slaves (barely half as many) left to free at the end of the war, you might want to ask. Simple population growth would require that more than 8.4 million slaves be in residence at the end of the war. Well that’s an easy answer. Some of them were already freed prior to the end of the war (a few tens of thousands) but those already freed people don’t even come close to accounting for the more than 4 million person difference. That residual 4 million number? That, my friends, is the death toll of American slavery. In less than 75 years more than 4 MILLION people died from slavery and its related conditions, and NOT from old age. There were more slaves who died in that period than the number of cows slaughtered for food in the same period.

So, as we can clearly see, the fact that the south didn’t have free (and European) immigrants coming in to their area was THEIR OWN FAULT for having the practice of slavery in place.

I’m not trying to belittle your personal knowledge of the situation or your “on-site” first person experience, but you are lacking some critical pieces of information, and further a bit of perspective adjustment would be advisable.

His Response:

“Which is all very true. But the slaves in Africa were already enslaved. Or 9 out of 10 times were killed after a tribe or what not were defeated. Now did the whites capitalize on this situation? Of course. Was it right? Definitely not.

As far as the Irish. Most white or Irish coming to America were the worst that Europe had to offer. And in most cases thought to be lower than the slave, or just above the status of a slave. I’ll research to see if I can find the book title that explains it better than me. Even the whites enslaved the whites. On my way! ample would be the Irish. But we won’t get into that. I’m not saying it all was right or wrong. It’s just how it is. The United States absolutely needed the sales, trade, and labor. Period. The end. And as far as the Mason-Dixon line…that may be what is written in the books. But I’ll have you know, above the Mason-Dixon line their were farm houses built after and during the war that have the chains and cages. I’ve seen it, I’ve touched it, I believe that the North had their slaves even before or during the war. Now could they have been rogue families or what not? Of course. But the south did have immigrants coming into the South. And not just enslaved people. Mostly they came into South Carolina if I’m not mistaken.

But even north of the Mason-Dixon line, Chestertown, Maryland. The Main Street ends at a boat ramp and dock. And right there at that dock is where the ships would come in to deliver goods and even slaves during and even after the war. Now is it in the books to be read? I’m not sure. It’s just what we learned in school there, and there is a placard on the dock letting visitors know what it is.

Regardless of which slave had a weapon or not. After serving in the army in the south you got freedom. Regardless if you had a rifle or not. Your freedom could be earned. Which isn’t right at all in my opinion.

All I’m saying is that you can’t really believe the history books when it comes to this situation. I’ve seen the difference with my own eyes. I went to school with 2 brothers that lived in a old house. It was built in the late 1800’s. I think 1890–1900. But in the basement it had chains and what not. And in the attic it had cages. And a big ditch from the house all the way across the field to the tree line. When did slavery end? Why were their chains and cages in a house built after the end of slavery? Seems odd right? I don’t think the homeowners were into BDSM stuff. I’m not saying you’re completely wrong. But I have seen things that will completely ruin the history books.

I know you’re not belittling what I think. It’s just a conversation.”

My Response:

1. They weren’t ALREADY SLAVES in Africa. They were kidnapped and enslaved SPECIFICALLY to be sent out of Africa as slaves. The slavers weren’t “taking advantage” of slaves already in existence. They were MAKING slaves out of free men and women to feed the slave markets overseas. The slave trade was a result of overseas market demand for slaves NOT the other way around.

2. You REALLY need to take some economics courses. Here’s a basic down and dirty overview: DEMAND is what drives the market NOT supply. Demand for slaves meant that slaves were “made” out of free African natives. It is literally impossible, both physically and economically, to drive a market demand by increasing the supply of specific goods (except down and only then in the price category, but we are looking at a market that is booming not going bust). It ONLY works the other way. Increase the supply, and the demand goes DOWN and consequently the price. Only if DEMAND increases can a supply increase be sustained in the long term. Availability of slaves is not the reason for the slave trade (which is what you just asserted above). DEMAND for slaves is what created slavers who kidnapped free Africans and MADE them slaves.

3. Your terminology is completely fucked. Whites were NEVER enslaved in America. Ever. Indentured servitude. Yep, absolutely. BUT indentured servitude is NOT slavery. AND that servitude was to pay back the loan that they got to pay for their passage across the Atlantic. After their period of service (again NOT SLAVERY, even though it could be considered to be CLOSE to slavery) was up, they were free. They still had all the rights of any free person other than having to work off their debt while they were indentured.

4. Yeah, MAYBE some houses had cages and chains north of the Mason-Dixon line. So what? They were breaking the law, and if they got caught they would get punished…that statement about houses north of hte M-D line having chains is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard (barring the above meme that is the source of this discussion, that is). That’s like someone saying that “guns are illegal in Chicago” and someone turning around and responding “No they aren’t, all the criminals there have them.” Well, no fucking shit…that’s because they are CRIMINALS and are BREAKING THE LAW. The law of the land was “no slaves.” Therefore anyone holding or keeping slaves north of the M-D line was a CRIMINAL. PERIOD. Anyone that had or kept slaves AFTER the Civil War was a criminal also. Period. You say, “well yeah but this one house had chains so slavery wasn’t ended.” Well actually, yes it was. Officially, by the 13th amendment. Slavery ended. Now that doesn’t mean that CRIMINALS didn’t break the law. They still do. Every day. So what if a few people still illegally tried to keep slaves. you missed the ENTIRE POINT of the meme AND the subsequent argument.

5. There is still slavery happening in the US right now TODAY. That fact doesn’t make it any less illegal. And that fact doesn’t make it any less despicable. And that fact doesn’t make it any less disgusting. Just because criminals still break the law doesn’t mean shit. There always have been, and always will (probably) be criminals. Again you missed the point entirely. The point was that someone (the meme creator and anyone that reposts it) thinks that black people owe white people a “thanks” for freeing them. The point I was making is that white people enslaved the black people in the first place and thus black people (in general) don’t owe white people (in general) shit for anything.

6. I don’t know why you decided to dive down this rabbit hole that has ZERO to do with those two original points, but you are way off topic now.

7. Yeah EVERYWHERE in the US got immigrants. You missed the point ENTIRELY…the point YOU were trying to make: Why did immigrants stay mostly in the north? That was YOUR question and the answer I gave you (which is 100% of the answer) was slavery and jobs. Period. There weren’t enough available jobs that paid well to justify moving south for 99% of the Europeanm non-African, non-enslaved immigrants.

8. And that whole thing about slaves serving in the southern army? Complete, total, absolute, bullshit, propaganda.

NOT ONE slave served as a combat soldier in the confederate army. It was illegal by Confederate Law and Confederate Army Policy. They didn’t trust blacks to not rebel and would not allow them to even touch weapons. It was summary execution for ANY black person or slave to touch a weapon, by ANYONE who caught them doing so. At the VERY end of the war when it was already clear the south was going to lose, there was a last ditch effort to force slaves to fight. It was a trial program of 50 slaves, and the program never finished. NONE of the southern slaves EVER served in combat in the Confederacy. NOT ONE documented case. If you have a source that says there was, that source is full of shit.

9. You keep saying you can’t believe history books, and yet you keep saying you are getting your information from books. Which is it? Because you cant have it both ways. Either books are “good info” or they are “bad info.” This is not absolutely true or factual, but the point is this: do you think that you personally are qualified and enough of a historian (regardless of whether you are amateur or professional) to be able to determine whether a specific book or specific statement is factual or historically true? Some books are indeed more factual than others, but your categorical dismissal of “all history books can’t be believed” is totally unfounded and complete and utter bullshit.

And before you answer, let me tell you this: I am what most people would consider a “history buff” as far as areas of learning there is NO OTHER AREA that I personally, have done more research and study within. That does not mean I am an expert nor does it mean that I am claiming to know everything about this (or any other) historical topic. I am merely presenting my credentials such as they are.

I minored in history at two different schools, and at one point, I almost majored in history with the intent of becoming a history professor. I still have the desire and will possibly go back to school for that very purpose…get a degree in history and teach the subject in a college somewhere. The decision to become a writer rather than a history professor was an economic one. I can currently make more money writing than teaching history.

Now, having said that, and knowing me personally for years, do you think I would feed you some bullshit?

10. If I say X is or is not what happened, you can damn well bet that X most likely happened (or did not happen) AND there is a whole bunch of factual, historical, documented, and peer reviewed information that says X happened (or did not happen as the case may be). AND that you could look it up and check for yourself…a thing I ALWAYS encourage people to do.

C’mon man…getting bullshit info off of some website, or out of some random book is not how you learn and gain facts. That’s how you confuse yourself and muddy the waters.

Remember our previous discussion on news outlets and how you determine whether it is a “good” source or not? You gotta do the same thing with EVERY piece of information you read or hear. EVERY piece. EVERY TIME.