FluffMuffin94
-bZ- Member
ITT: Retards
Welcome to Banzore!
Be part of something great, join today!
Have Y'all Lost Your Fucking Minds??
- Thread starter xBlastFTPastx
- Start date
hey fuck you canadians understand this too, it's just retards who dont
You know our history growing up (US retard here) skews the story of slavery as an insular US form of economics.
When in reality, it is a global phenomenon that still exists in modern era.
Feel free to Google what open an open air cobalt mine is in the DRC. The auto industry has a nasty habbit ( remember those rubber tree plantations) Gotta fuck the rest of the world for our “Go Green” Economy.
Sincerely,
Form the peanut gallery
Likely both retarded Canadians
If you're low-functioning autistic and have no context comprehension then sure, maybe 3/5 is his favorite fraction and he was using it as a compliment
3/5ths means sub-human. Animal. Three fifths of a human being. That is literally how it was used. It doesnt strictly mean the word they want it to mean. Just like our previous discussion about "African" in an past thread. If someone's mind goes to n-word shit reading this, THEY are the fucking racist. Closeted subconscious racist shit and victimhood mentality. Absolute whiny crybabies. I bet these guys have never seen a black person in real life. Segregated American retards. Similar fractional shit is used against Balkan Slavs all the time. These guys really are stupid and know absolutely nothing outside The Star Spangled Banner and blowing each others' brains out.
That's why I support the return of the word "thrall". It has good, solid Germanic etymology that doesn't discriminate against any one particular ethnic group. Our ( or at least mine anyway ) Anglo-Saxon ancestors knew that the state of bondage was not reserved specifically for any race of people and instead was reserved for vanquished foes and conquered enemies as well as the descendants of those people. All of their thralls were Romano-Britons who were white as the driven snow.
But seriously this has gotten way out of hand. Dedflirwhiner could easily appeal himself. If this was a genuine misunderstanding them I am sure that the truth will - to stick with the topic of manumission - set him free. As I said before I think the real reason for the 1 day ban was the comment in conjunction with his previous filter violations. Given the context of those violations ( which I presume are related to racism as that is what the filter covers, with the slight exceptions of occasional mistypes like swapping and N for a B in "big" or referring to everyone's favorite Saltine baked goods ) it seems reasonable that Dedflirwhiner's comment was in reference to the previously-mentioned 3/5th Compromise which was adopted at a time when the overwhelming majority of enslaved persons within the soon-to-be United States were of African descent and because of this it is also reasonable to conclude that Dedflirwhiner's comment was intended to be racist towards black people by implying that RipeSnipe was a slave and black and that he was enslaved because he was black.
Perhaps Swag's punishment was excessive, I can concede that one might think so given Dedflirwhiner's reputation. However I do not object to the reasoning ( I presumed to have been ) used by Swag to judge Dedflirwhiner worthy of some form of punishment for the infraction. While a complicated process of semantics and other mental gymnastics could be used to claim innocence on Dedflirwhiner's part ( also noteworthy that none of this is being done by him ) the explanation that most reasonable Americans within Swag's situation ( where he is both the finder of fact and the finder of law ) would have determined that Dedflirwhiner's comment was indeed intended to be racist.
I have no idea why you guys care so much about this. Dedflirwhiner is free to appeal this decision himself. A simple mea culpa would do wonders here I think.
You heard it here first folks, sabre approves of slavery.
Finally, someone with some sense, who knows things, and has left his house in the past two decades.
I have to disagree here. It is entirely reasonable, and the default definition, that Ded was referring to Ripe as subhuman. As animal. Can we not shit talk with words like sub-human, animal, and ape? Are those words banned? Because that is strictly what 3/5ths means. If Americans want to apply their brand of American racism on it, that's on them.
Shut the fuck up idiot.
Hahahahahahahaha no
That's not entirely true. A statement from the Federalist Papers referring to this is as follows :
"We subscribe to the doctrine," might one of our Southern brethren observe, "that representation relates more immediately to persons, and taxation more immediately to property, and we join in the application of this distinction to the case of our slaves. But we must deny the fact, that slaves are considered merely as property, and in no respect whatever as persons. The true state of the case is, that they partake of both these qualities: being considered by our laws, in some respects, as persons, and in other respects as property...Let the case of the slaves be considered, as it is in truth, a peculiar one. Let the compromising expedient of the Constitution be mutually adopted, which regards them as inhabitants, but as debased by servitude below the equal level of free inhabitants, which regards the SLAVE as divested of two fifths of the MAN...The federal Constitution, therefore, decides with great propriety on the case of our slaves, when it views them in the mixed character of persons and of property. This is in fact their true character. It is the character bestowed on them by the laws under which they live; and it will not be denied, that these are the proper criterion; because it is only under the pretext that the laws have transformed the negroes into subjects of property, that a place is disputed them in the computation of numbers; and it is admitted, that if the laws were to restore the rights which have been taken away, the negroes could no longer be refused an equal share of representation with the other inhabitants.
As you can see it was more an attempt by James Madison and Alexander Hamilton to balance the ideas of both representation and taxation with the realization that some people were enslaved by other people within certain states within the fledgling country. This in no way excuses their actions of enslaving these people - which I think we can all agree is a heinous and reprehensible crime - but the final statement "and it is admitted, that if the laws were to restore the rights which have been taken away, the negroes could no longer be refused an equal share of representation with the other inhabitants." indicates that, had the circumstances been different at the time and slavery as both a status and an institution did not exist, they would have granted representation to these people equally with the rest of the non-enslaved population.
Using a comeback 3 times. Look at you.
Cry about it.
You're like an npc that has 3 lines they can repeat. This is great.
You also can't figure out how previous infractions might impact the punishment.
Meow meow kitty kitty!
Wholly incorrect. There is about of 20+ regular players that are extremely confused as to why the guy calling out racists you guys miss in chat on the reg, got banned for it. Who even are you anyway?
Well, yes you do seem you just want to ban; There was zero thought in this ban. You see him daily, if the conversation turns into race, this is something as a black man he deals with daily. To be able to joke about it is important. You have a guy who goes to BZ servers daily, and has become affectionately familiar with people. When the topic comes up, he may poke because he trusts you to know him and understand the joke.
I find it interesting you are now holding up a fake egregious history here too. WE all know and see him expose racists, and to do so you may run up against the filter sometimes. OH, but let's all ignore that, and instead use that as support for his ban? This is all because Snipe, who BSS has never had any issue with, didn't like reading his name in that moment, totally not understanding the context and didn't bother to find out.
No warning, no understanding at all, never approached the guy about the language filters of the past, just lead the guy to think he's in good standing. Then you go after one of the many people confused by this here in this thread.
PS. Gauss, it's such a obvious wrongful ban, you'll have pardon ded for not coming to appeal a 1 day ban over a joke. What more is there to argue for the person banned, who you gave no credit to, no benefit of the doubt in that moment.