Well okay I understand. I just wonder why people bring up the fact that there were blacks that owned slaves in the South as if that changes anything. I see it done a lot in FR and wonder why that happens. Is it a response to liberals or something?
It is usually brought up in response to someone saying that the only logical thing for a slave to do is to support the invader.
Sadly, as evidenced even by today's headlines, people are not always logical about welcoming an invader, even if that invader is on a mission to free them.
The fact that free blacks owned slaves simply points to the widespread philosophical acceptance of slavery as an institution. Many were the arguments that the slaves were better off as slaves, than they had been in their primitive lives. This even has a familiar tone to it in that our civil masters think that they can decide what is good for us better than we can decide it for ourselves.
Re: "I just wonder why people bring up the fact that there were blacks that owned slaves in the South as if that changes anything."
Because it is interesting, counterintuitive, ironic. It is just the sort of thing that makes history a passion for some people. I hated history in High School because all life was rung out of it. This is life it has twists and turns that are unexpected. Hollywood makes millions selling stories to people who want entertainment. Fictions writers make millions selling fake stories to people. Here is real life for free and it belongs to all. Why would we want to know about it.