Did poor whites in the South benefit at all from slavery?

Did poor whites in the South benefit at all from slavery?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    yes, now go back to sleep moron

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Slavery was never profitable.
      All replies below are spam. All posters below are mentally moronic and have Down syndrome, and cannot read.

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Yes. Joining an anti slave militia and catching and returning runaway slaves was a form of workfare that poor southerners could use to subsidize their farms. Others would either be directly employed in the form of overseers and middle managers, or indirectly in the form of cottage industries that grew up around slave money.

  3. 2 years ago
    Chud Anon

    No, they got stuck dealing with the rich plantation owners leftover farm equipment.

    • 2 years ago
      Afro Saxon

      And the women are very grateful for it.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        youre entire existence is based on using the animated sperm of a White mans ballsack to inject your children with Whiteness to escape what you claim to be proud of kek

        • 2 years ago
          Afro Saxon

          Whatever helps you cope.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >fetish porn reaffirms blackness
            hate to see it
            black coomers need help and troons need the bullet

          • 2 years ago
            Afro Saxon

            Bruh I'm just posting Whites fetishes.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        what is up with that 90's haircut wojak?

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, they had their own economic niche and they never had to compete for jobs. And they hoped they could one day become wealthy plantation owners themselves. Which is why lynchings and race riots happened after the end of slavery, because they suddenly had to compete with millions of blacks

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      I like how your post is mentally moronic.

    • 2 years ago
      Chud Anon

      Honestly sending them back would have been a win win for everyone.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >they had their own economic niche and they never had to compete for jobs.

      Literally the opposite moron, the existence of slaves literally meant the entire south had a poor superfluous population of whites who couldn't find jobs at all. The only whites who had work were the service workers for plantation owners kids, like ballet instructors and horse trainers.

      • 2 years ago
        Chud Anon

        No dude, there were millions of poor whites in slave catching armies, that’s why it’s ok to hate everyone from the south and hold them complicit for slavery.

        Just like in every other slave nation like Rome, China, and Greece. There were three classes of people, the elite, slaves, and slave catchers. No other jobs existed, and to say otherwise is imperialist propaganda meant to harm BIPOC.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          At this point I can't tell if it is satire.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Thought he was my professor for a second.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        White farmers without slaves existed in the South. In fact most southern states were split 50/50 between blacks and Whites, and without much industry, most whites had to be farmers.

        >The only whites who had work were the service workers for plantation owners kids, like ballet instructors and horse trainers

        You are describing "Saint-Domingue" here, aka modern day Haiti. Though these jobs would have been probably filled by Mulattos and not pure whites.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >White farmers without slaves existed in the South

          Barely. And it wasn't commercial farming, it was subsistence. There's a reason the South was a miserable aristocratic shithole before it was forced to industrialize.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            My point wasn't to say that Whites were well off, my point was that if a state is split 50/50 White/black, most Whites had to be farmers due to a lack of Industry and what we would call "Service Industry" nowadays.
            The South wasn't a Carribean sugar plantation after all.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            True. Government land was for sale all over the old northwest. Motivated poors had a way to escape hardscrabble southern land for deep, glaciated soils of the midwest on the cheap. That's why I'm a Hoosier, my family lines all trace from md/nc/va then into the Hoosier state by the 1840s.

  5. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    No. Slavery never benefits the common worker because free labor edges you out.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      it doesnt matter because reincarnation and karma exist and youll either be born into a family with wealth next time or youll come into possession of capital by charm or accident if youre virtuous.

  6. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Yes. Two races can't exist in the same country without a clear hierarchy between them. Attempting to exist on equal terms merely results in the destruction of both.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Dilate

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Doesnt Central Asia debunk this?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        How?

  7. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    They simultaneously didn't benefit because they are poor and low socio-economic status and only supported the inefficient system of slavery because they were just irrationally racist against blacks for no reason and wanted a caste they could look down on, but also did benefit and need to atone to the modern descendants of slaves for stealing the wealth of their ancestors whom had their labour stolen from them.

  8. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    No the poor dont benefit from anything ever

    • 2 years ago
      Chud Anon

      Except for white people, thanks to institutional racism in Amerikkka poor whites were assimilated into a massive slave catching class which provided a majority of the south’s workforce. The other whites were all ballet teachers in the plantations.

      There’s four tiers of the southern economy:
      Plantation owners
      Ballet teachers
      Slave catchers
      Slaves

      It’s not the truth you want to hear, but it’s time for amerikkka to #heal

  9. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Yes and no. Yeoman whites might have benefited some from the trickle down of wealth generated by plantation agriculture, but slave labor depressed wages and limited upward mobility for poor whites. Look at someone like Nathaniel Banks, who went from a child laborer in a Massachusetts mill to Speaker of the House and a (terrible) major general. Rags to riches stories in the south were rare, except via slavery, like Faulkner’s fictional poor white Colonel Sutpen, who carved out a slave empire in the Mississippi wilderness. Poor whites farmed marginal land and seethed at the darkies and their owners, but still followed them into battle when the war kicked off.

  10. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Psychologically maybe. They lived in poverty too though.

  11. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    No, in fact they didn't like it because it took their jobs. Even the slaves knew it was worse to be a poor white man than a slave. They had work songs with lyrics including such dynamics.

  12. 2 years ago
    Chud Anon

    >whiteoids with a beastiality fetish are making a new breed of lackwit mutts

    More proof we should have sent them back.

    • 2 years ago
      Afro Saxon

      >Implying Nafaris weren't the first cuck fetishes.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *