[stand watie]

while i am NO FAN of the slavers (all too many of them COLLOBORATED with the invading union army/the ENEMY, in return for promises to "protect their human property" in perpetuity!), your blanket statement that the slaves were badly treated is SILLY.

NO intelligent farmer intentionally mistreats his EXPENSIVE livestock, though a FEW fools MAY do so at times.

COMMON SENSE & LOGIC indicate that your position is faulty at BEST & intentionally deceptive at worst. furthermore that position is an example of the REVISIONIST PAP & ARROGANT self-righteous NONSENSE,out of the most extreme, LEFTIST, America-HATING, lunatic-fringe of the "poison ivy league" history departments.

free dixie,sw

[LS]

And you betray your ignorance of slave records. All the evidence (Fogel's new "Without Consent or Contract," Huston's new "Calculating the Value of the Union," and many, many more works) show that slavery was about so much more than mere economics, and that if ONLY economics had been involved, you would be right---but sadly, slavery was also about race, power, and social class structure. Your argument is as senseless as asking how people could abuse their children. After all, they have an economic stake in keeping them healthy.