How do you think Blacks today would receive Nat Turner?

[BodeineBrazy]

Serious Question... I have my thoughts but I want to write an essay on this subject and I respect some of you guys opinion.

A lot of people don't understand that despite the fact that we glorify him now. Historians (White One's) basically view him as an absolute fanatic and villian. I know the relevant discussion is Dallas right now. But the parallels are absolutely there.

Do you think he thought he was going to end Slavery with his rebellion? Did Micah?

Serious question?

 

[DrX]

Serious Question... I have my thoughts but I want to write an essay on this subject and I respect some of you guys opinion.

A lot of people don't understand that despite the fact that we glorify him now. Historians (White One's) basically view him as an absolute fanatic and villian. I know the relevant discussion is Dallas right now. But the parallels are absolutely there.

Do you think he thought he was going to end Slavery with his rebellion? Did Micah? Nat killed babies.

most black ppl are terrified at work to even allude to the shootings.... nat turner would get snitched on .....

 

[Concerning VIolence]

Take Nat Turner out and insert any other black revolutionary figure from history and the answer's the same.

 

[The BasedFather]

Do you think he thought he was going to end Slavery with his rebellion? Did Micah? Nat killed babies.

No. He was fed up with the situation he was in and did something about it even if it meant death.

White people fed black children to gators, raped them, forced them to work and be their servants, so what's your point?

 

[Oceanicpuppy]

They might say he is soft because he was light skin. ( yes nat turner was lightskin )

 

[↓R↑LYB]

The house salves would have been on Twitter talmbout "An eye for an eye leads the whole world blind. We just need to trust in God and let him work it out #MassaLivesMatter"

 

[2stainz]

this would be a very good research topic, people's response to an attempt to change the reality they are apart of

 

[desjardins]

Well context is a little bit different since we were literally property back then, at least now we have "rights" on paper.
Also now there are a lot more rich c00ns and other black people who have agendas that force them to decry any kind of rebellion. I also think self hate is much more prevalent now as we've had whole generations of people claiming to be half native american , adhering to european beauty standards via the adoption of weaves and green contacts, and just generally thinking the white mans ice is colder.
I say all that to say we are probably way more conditioned now then we were then , which is crazy since we now have "freedom". As a result anyone who tries to start a real violent revolution will probably be turned against and informed on if they aren't outright set up and killed like malcolm and fred hampton

 

[Ol’Otis]

Nat Turner messing it up for us

 

[JayGatsby]

parallels where

 

[Freddie.Cane]

I don't Know @LaughsLikePac But my mood when coward nikkas bring up Dr.King didn't dream of this

 

[BocaRear]

Don't belittle what Nat Turner did, he fought the active slavery of African Americans.
He killed those who OWNED black people and KILLED them. Not random white people.
In fact Turner didn't even kill the poor white farmers, him and the rebels spared them because "Turner believed the poor white inhabitants 'thought no better of themselves than they did of negros" ".

I wonder what the Coli militants would think about Nat sparing poor white people?

If Nat Turner was alive in this day and age he would no doubt be pushing economic power and not aimless killing of Dallas police officers, I mean honestly what is the correlation between the police officers in Dallas and the ones who killed Sterling and Castiel? If you were to kill anyone, why not attack the perpetrators?

 

[↓R↑LYB]

Don't belittle what Nat Turner did, he fought the active slavery of African Americans.
He killed those who OWNED black people and KILLED them. Not random white people.
In fact Turner didn't even kill the poor white farmers, him and the rebels spared them because "Turner believed the poor white inhabitants 'thought no better of themselves than they did of negros" ".

I wonder what the Coli militants would think about Nat sparing poor white people?

If Nat Turner was alive in this day and age he would no doubt be pushing economic power and not aimless killing of Dallas police officers, I mean honestly what is the correlation between the police officers in Dallas and the ones who killed Sterling and Castiel? If you were to kill anyone, why not attack the perpetrators?

Had he murdered those devils he probably would have survived a lot longer. He was a very wise man and I'm sure if he could do it again he wouldn't make the same mistake of letting them live.

 

[BelowTheMasonDixon]

Nat Turners rebellion killed 60.

Within a day of the suppression of the rebellion, the local militia and three companies of artillery were joined by detachments of men from the USS Natchez andUSS Warren, which were anchored in Norfolk, and militias from counties in Virginia and North Carolina surrounding Southampton.[16] The state executed 56 blacks and militias killed at least 100 blacks.[18] An estimated 200 blacks were killed, most of whom were not involved with the rebellion.[19]

Rumors quickly spread among whites that the slave revolt was not limited to Southampton, and that it had spread as far south as Alabama. Fears led to reports in North Carolina that "armies" of slaves were seen on highways, had burned and massacred the white inhabitants of Wilmington, a black-majority city; and were marching on the state capital.[13] Such fear and alarm led to whites' attacking blacks across the South with flimsy cause–the editor of the Richmond Whig, writing "with pain," described the scene as "the slaughter of many blacks without trial and under circumstances of great barbarity."[20] Two weeks after the rebellion had been suppressed, the white violence against the blacks continued. General Eppes ordered troops and white citizens to stop the killing:

"He [the General] will not specify all the instances that he is bound to believe have occurred, but pass in silence what has happened, with the expression of his deepest sorrow, that any necessity should be supposed to have existed, to justify a single act of atrocity. But he feels himself bound to declare, and hereby announces to the troops and citizens, that no excuse will be allowed for any similar acts of violence, after the promulgation of this order."

A company of militia from Hertford County, North Carolina reportedly killed 40 blacks in one day and took $23 and a gold watch from the dead.[23] Captain Solon Borland, who led a contingent from Murfreesboro, North Carolina, condemned the acts "because it was tantamount to theft from the white owners of the slaves."[23] Blacks suspected of participating in the rebellion were beheaded by the militia. "Their severed heads were mounted on poles at crossroads as a grisly form of intimidation."[23] A section of Virginia State Route 658 remains labeled as "Blackhead Signpost Road" in reference to these events.

Do with that what you will.

 

[BodeineBrazy]

Don't belittle what Nat Turner did, he fought the active slavery of African Americans.
He killed those who OWNED black people and KILLED them. Not random white people.
In fact Turner didn't even kill the poor white farmers, him and the rebels spared them because "Turner believed the poor white inhabitants 'thought no better of themselves than they did of negros" ".

I wonder what the Coli militants would think about Nat sparing poor white people?

If Nat Turner was alive in this day and age he would no doubt be pushing economic power and not aimless killing of Dallas police officers, I mean honestly what is the correlation between the police officers in Dallas and the ones who killed Sterling and Castiel? If you were to kill anyone, why not attack the perpetrators?

We are active slaves now. Im not belittling him at all. Im very versed in what Nat Turner did. Or rather what they say he did because there are a multitude of interpretations of his story and statements.

NOBODY ever spoke to him except for one person bro. So who knows what happened. Be wary of that. Because one white guy translated his sentiments into what people quote as fact today.

Based off his ACTIONS he killed Infants bro... so your point is kinda lost in that because If he only wanted to kill his "Masters", "Owners" or however u want to frame it. Why kill INNOCENT BABIES. He wasn't remorseful about it either. If you read his so called "statement" fabricated or not he gave no fukks.

Economic Revolution is dope, but that idea overlooks situations like Black Wallstreet where its been explicitly shown that they dont give a fukk and will bomb there own country with no provocation to counteract that. This relationship isnt working. Why are we fooling ourselves. Thats a whole other topic entirely.

Turner says that his master, Mr. Joseph Travis, was "kind" and "placed the greatest confidence in me" (p. 11). Nonetheless, the group decides they will "commence at [his] home on that night, and until we had armed and equipped ourselves, and gathered sufficient force, neither age nor sex was to be spared,"

Nat was about that work and I doubt he saw whites as poor or rich because he claims he was compelled by god to purge all white people.

I respect your opinion tho.