If Nat Turner was president of the United States, you'd be looking at a much different US.
So let's put together a scenario in which this would be possible - if there was a massive **** revolt in 1830 as Turner intended, which instead of being suppressed by the local authorities (as it was), spread nationwide and resulted in civil war.
You would probably have a situation similar to that of Haiti. After the conquest of 1830s America, you would be left with a Black majority and a small White, Hispanic, and Native American minority.
Afterwards, they would most likely develop a socialist system of government, as their experience with capitalism would lead them to believe it would eventually re-create a system of servitude and privilege. Which means, this would change the course of world history.
Remember, this is taking place at the same time that Karl Marx is developing Communism in Russia. So theoretically, the US could become a Communist nation.
This is just one of the possibilities. But it raises an interesting question. Holla!
If Nat Turner was president of the United States, you'd be looking at a much different US.
So let's put together a scenario in which this would be possible - if there was a massive **** revolt in 1830 as Turner intended, which instead of being suppressed by the local authorities (as it was), spread nationwide and resulted in civil war.
You would probably have a situation similar to that of Haiti. After the conquest of 1830s America, you would be left with a Black majority and a small White, Hispanic, and Native American minority.
Afterwards, they would most likely develop a socialist system of government, as their experience with capitalism would lead them to believe it would eventually re-create a system of servitude and privilege. Which means, this would change the course of world history.
Remember, this is taking place at the same time that Karl Marx is developing Communism in Russia. So theoretically, the US could become a Communist nation.
lol, can i borrow your brain for a day??
nah, seriously though....it really is an interesting question...
kind of along w/ what Neo said...I think Nat being prez would mean all hell would break loose forreal...
i think Malcolm would be the better selection between the two...but I guess he'd moreso be better for Blacks based on his vision & mindset....he'd probably be like, "hell to tha White folks (or *ahem* 'crackaz')...whateva they r gonna do is up 2 them" lol...we'd have to have two presidents....
question, tho, Neo...u spoke on what it'd be like if Nat were prez back in tha day...what about now? today...2004...how do u think he'd fit in with today's society/this country...?
let me start of by asking NeoSoulBrotha if he's free October 18, 2005 'cause that's when I'll be legal.......?......nah scratch that back to the topic....
No Nat Turner for president. He has no sense of timing, was too impetuous. At the time of his revolt, the leaders of the US were contemplating eradicating slavery in some areas, and reducing it in others, and where there was slavery, loosening some of the tight "black codes" to give them some iota of rights and humanity. In other words, White America was gettin sick of slavery. But with his revolt, it snapped them back to their senses, so to speak, and sparked a revival in anti-black passions, leading to tightened "black codes" & such. Had he not started what he did at the time that he did, slavery may(emphasis on MAY, because no one will ever know) have been eradicated decades earlier. So I wouldn't want him as a president now because with the situation we are in as far as foreign policy, wars, and domestic strife as far as race relations, his track record doesn't lend himself as being one who does the right thing at the right time.
Now Mr. X, if we were talking about post-Mecca Malcom, I wouldn't mind him being the President. Pre-Mecca Malcom didn't care about white people at all and, seeing as this country is like 70% white, that would cause a problem :lol: . Once he came from Mecca and saw all the diversity of people come together for a common peaceful cause, it mellowed him out a little to other races and ethnicities besides the Great Black Cause. In another time and place, he would've been King.
Now Mr. X, if we were talking about post-Mecca Malcom, I wouldn't mind him being the President. Pre-Mecca Malcom didn't care about white people at all and, seeing as this country is like 70% white, that would cause a problem :lol: . Once he came from Mecca and saw all the diversity of people come together for a common peaceful cause, it mellowed him out a little to other races and ethnicities besides the Great Black Cause. In another time and place, he would've been King.
If Nat Turner was president of the United States, you'd be looking at a much different US.
So let's put together a scenario in which this would be possible - if there was a massive **** revolt in 1830 as Turner intended, which instead of being suppressed by the local authorities (as it was), spread nationwide and resulted in civil war.
You would probably have a situation similar to that of Haiti. After the conquest of 1830s America, you would be left with a Black majority and a small White, Hispanic, and Native American minority.
Afterwards, they would most likely develop a socialist system of government, as their experience with capitalism would lead them to believe it would eventually re-create a system of servitude and privilege. Which means, this would change the course of world history.
Remember, this is taking place at the same time that Karl Marx is developing Communism in Russia. So theoretically, the US could become a Communist nation.
This is just one of the possibilities. But it raises an interesting question. Holla!
Nah, I gotta disagree with you for a minute Neo. I doubt that America would end up like Haiti. When slavery was fully abolished in 1864 there were 4 million blacks in the country.
Haiti was a population that was majority slaves. Therefore it was easier for them to revolt and over-run the country. Not to mention that Haiti was a smaller island and tacticfully is easier to defend.
Ibelive if Nat had his way, Black folx would've been **** in a civil war. Because of the fact that from an Industrial Point of view, white folx would've had more
A) Factories
B) Manpower
C)Technology/Money
they could've waged war alot longer than blacks could. As President Turner wasn't very good because of the fact that he didn't think out his plan to well because it simply relied on death and murder. A smarter man would've took hostages or captured a key gov't facility. As President, congress would've BLOCKED every law he tried to pass. If Congress doesn't like the President then you'll end up having situations like Andrew Johnson did during his Presidency.
Malcolm X post-Mecca probably would've been a better choice because he made the whites feel safer. But someone still would've assassinated him.
