"I simply said that the antebellum south was not comparable to modern North Korea. I stand by that. "

You said slavery was humane, did you not. You said andrew Jackson was "humane to his slaves did you not? Do you stand by that Mr. Historian?

The most intellectual slave holder ever, Thomas Jefferson was ahead of his time. He, nlike the rest of his generation, did not feel it was necessary to go to an outhouse to do his business. So what he did was built an indoor outhouse... a hole that went to the basement. Jefferson would shit into the basement, and slaves who lived nearby would clean it up, off the floor, the walls etc. Jefferson had the reputation as a very humane slave owner, don't you agree dipplayer?

Relatively humane. Compared to North Korea.

You did not say relatively humane, you did not mean it you said many slave owners were humane.

And on your supposed argument, it is as asinine as your real argument. I don't know where in the hell you are getting that American slavery is more humane than North Korea. Slaves were fed subsistence rations, were forced to do backbreaking work with an overseer overlooking them at all times with a whip, families were NOT recognized by law despite what you claim and perceived families were used as leverage to keep the slave in line (or else I'm going to put you in my pocket). And when the plantation went through dire times, familys were split up at the drop of a hat and slaves sold to the highest bidder. Is that more humane than anything? Oh, and you didn't commit a crime to be there, ou were born into it and unless your master had a change of heart, you died in it.

Who committed a crime to be born in North Korea? Maybe you need to read up on the conditions there.

BTW, your Jeffersonian indoor outhouse cleaned by slaves is bullshit and conjecture.

it is neither bull shit nor conjecture, I kinda got my degree in early republican history, and I kinda know a Jefferson historian who kinda gave me that information. It is also, after a quick internet search backed up on Montecello's website, although they left the most unpleasant bits out unsurprisingly. Perhaps you need to read up on conditions in the south and stop pretending you know a god damned thing about history.

these conservative historians/apologists are the worst

I looked at the same website you did. "They left out the worst." Yeah, okay. I'm supposed to take it on your word.

American Democracy people, My ignorance is as good as your knowledge!

by the way were you correct about Andrew Jackson being a humane massa? You haven't said a word about that.

"It's an old saying, "Don't make the perfect the enemy of the good." It means to not be so determined to see perfection in human endeavors that we fail to recognize the good that is there, the good that has been accomplished. It's a recognition of reality. Yes, the Ideals we have are there to spur us on. I have argued here that Absolute Goodness is real, but I also have argued that ours is an imperfect world, that we cannot achieve paradise here, no matter our efforts. It's not punishing ourselves when we fall short, as we will."

I agree with this 100%, so it was obviously just a wording issue. You have to be pragmatic in your quest for unattainable perfection.

Oh, yes, right, let us all remember that these men were humane to the men women and children they claimed as their property. Good grief. I have no doubt that there is also humanity in North Korean labor camps - what of it? It remains a great evil.

I think you've got me wrongly pegged in your second and third paragraphs there. Race relations could surely have been not much worse than they were under white rule. If rebel slaves were militarily successful, they could have forced concessions from the federal government, including the abolition of slavery. If slaves had been armed, the legacy of Reconstruction might not have been reversed with Jim Crow.

It's all counterfactual, again, but I think it's a bit of a jump to just say that a slave rebellion would have been a bad thing on the whole.

I think your version of the "stability" of the south forgets the daily hardships of the black population. Peace for the whites would end, to be sure, but for the black slaves it could hardly have gotten much worse.

Well, I do think it was shameful the way the blacks were abandoned after Reconstruction. It's taken over a century for the wounds of slavery and its aftermath to come closer to being healed, and race remains the deepest, thorniest issue in the American experience. There's no denying that. I don't see how a black rebellion, even if successful, would have avoided or improved on that situation.

put guns in the hands of blacks so that the oppressed could have defended themselves against the oppressors rather than let the bushwhackers, klan members and slave holders gain a monopoly over violence. Aren't you one of the dipshits that insists that every American should be armed in case there is cause for a revolution? Wouldn't that be "messy"

Yes, I believe I argued that the blacks of the south needing arms to defend themselves was an example of why the 2nd Amendment was good and relevant.

"Put guns in the hands of blacks so that the oppressed could have defended themselves against the oppressors rather than let the bushwhackers, klan members and slave holders gain a monopoly over violence."

I was going to say effectively this.

As to abgemacht's point about why shouldn't we all be working to end the situation in North Korea:

as someone who is far removed from most of the worldwide problems that are the worst, like North Korean labor camps, people being driven from their lands, companies privatizing the water supply and letting poor people thirst, victims of forgotten wars, and the billion undernourished people on Earth, and indeed modern slavery, one must pragmatically understand that something must be done about all of these, but each individual person must address only a few commensurate with their capabilities.

I judge I have a much greater aptitude and ability to address what I have been preparing to tackle for the past few years, namely rural development in Africa. There are activists working to undermine the North Korean regime, however, and they are doing the right thing.

In the modern context, what is important is if you are doing everything you can do improve something important, not whether you are improving every problem. To maximize the impact, it helps to choose A) the most serious and overlooked problems (so usually the severely oppressed) and B) an area where your own skills are best suited.

If I was a marksman or a spy, I might be headed to North Korea. You don't have to believe me if you don't want to. I just wanted to answer you question, which is a good question by the way.