What 1619 Project hucksters don't understand about the history of slavery

[Absalom]

Well yes and no. Someone's misinterpretation of the Bible does not represent the Bible itself.
Torah does not in fact condemn slavery, but it does leave explicit instructions with regard to servitude, which in fact align more with abolitionists than it does those who would use it to endorse slavery according to the world.

-----------------------
Roamer, fair retort!

[Sled Dog]

Enslavement and Oppression are two different concepts. And opression  better describes the plight of the Jews from Egypt circa 1430 bc.  In fact, Exodus 13:1-16  notes that they left with their livestock.  Think slaves would have owned their own oxen, and cattle?  I am sure there were slaves, but not totally as a people.

The Jews under Egypt were slaves.

Slaves are oppressed.

The slaves in the US could own their own property, too.  They kept their own clothes.  The slaves under the Romans could be fairly well off, too, if they were favored.

So some of the Jews had beasts of burden and even gold.   Doesn't mean the people as a whole weren't slaves in bondage.   If they were free people, they could have implemented free market reforms and sold pharoah the best bricks ever.


And this is enough.  I corrected the false statement about the Bible not condemning slavery, so the correctees are resorting to quibbles.

If today's (b)lacks want to become slaves again, and by all indications most of them do, then fine.   But I'll not become their slave in return.   I owe them nothing and never have.

[catfish1957]

The Jews under Egypt were slaves.

Slaves are oppressed.

The slaves in the US could own their own property, too.  They kept their own clothes.  The slaves under the Romans could be fairly well off, too, if they were favored.

So some of the Jews had beasts of burden and even gold.   Doesn't mean the people as a whole weren't slaves in bondage.   If they were free people, they could have implemented free market reforms and sold pharoah the best bricks ever.

Sorry dude... 

(1) US Slaves could not own property in the antebellum south.  They were property
(2) Slaves in the context of 1400 b.c. Jews aren't going to own gold, nor livestock.  Again, there were probably examples and a percentage of them that were slaves.  But they weren't as a people.
(3) And the free market comment? I guess that is your attempt at humor. 
(4) Slavery and opression are not synomomous.  My ancestors after 1066 were opressed by the Norman invaders, but were not slaves.  Believe me, if the Phaoroh truly had enslaved totally the Jewish population, there would have been prisons, cages, and shackles at the first hint of rebellion.