Less than half of all the slave owners in 1860 in the US were white

Saw an user post this yesterday and didn't believe that son of a bitch but I got home from work, and poured a scotch and sat down to check the source.
Turns out that faggot was right. Out of 384k slave owners in 1860 in the United states, 155k were black and 106k were mullato.
Www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
1860a document 2 pg 10 and 1860b document 8 pg 64

Other urls found in this thread:

census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html#y1860
www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1860a.zip
www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1860b.zip
newobserveronline.com/hidden-facts-about-slavery-in-america/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Gee, I wonder why that is not common knowledge.

Bump

They're still technically white

Lot of plantation owners didn't have wives and left the land to their house successor or private slave ( negress ). By the time this got popular the civil war began.

Need more data

Cite

Dat was me.. :)

Go here and download 2 LARGE PDFS
census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html#y1860

Download these two:
Population of the United States in 1860; comp. from the original returns of the Eighth Census...
Title Page [PDF], Full Document [ZIP, 113.7 MB] (Download the FULL Document)

Agriculture of the United States in 1860; comp. from the original returns of the Eighth Census...
Title Page [PDF], Full Document [ZIP, 58.9 MB] (Download the FULL Document)

Now look at the Population of the United States in 1860 at 1860a-02.pdf and page xii
Now look at the Agriculture of the United States in 1860 at 1860b-08.pdf and page 247

Now there where 384,884 TOTAL Slaveholders in the US in 1860
of those 261,198 were Black or Mulatto, 155,148 were Black, 106,770 were Mulatto
So 261,884/384,884 = .68
155,148/384,884 = .40
106,770/384.884 = .277


68% of Slave Owners in 1860 in the entire USA were Black or Mulatto
40% of Slave Owners in 1860 in the entire USA were Black
28% of Slave Owners in 1860 in the entire USA were Mulatto
32% of Slave Owners in 1860 in the entire USA were WHITE

The US Civil War started in 1861...

Is this a joke?

If it isn't, you need to read it again, because it says nothing of the sort.

bump I saw this as well

Total Slaveholders in 1860
1 year before the Civil War

Number of Colored and Mulatto Slaveowners in 1860

Not an argument faggot

You guys, what the actual fuck...

When it says "non-slaveholding" and "slaveholding," it's not talking about people owning slaves, but the population split between states that allow slavery and those that don't.

Thus the label "STATES" above it, which makes no sense otherwise.

It's the states that are slaveholding, dumbass

>only faggots can read simple charts

you solved the mystery user!

>those numbers break down free blacks in slave states versus non slave states

Explains why these two percentages add up.

Are you saying that is the number of Blacks in the Slaveholding and non Slaveholding states ?

So me your math on this. Im not gettting it.

There where over 3 million black slaves at the time.

u r gay

The other chart clearly proves that slaveholders number 384k people that own varying amounts of slaves. The race of slave holders is then broken down in the chart I posted. You niggers are retarded.

It's the number of free blacks, user. Not the total number of blacks including slaves.

It's right there on the chart.

How many of the remaining slave owners were jews?

Where can I find that exact PDF? I looked in the source and pulled up the year 1860, but can't find the page you posted

Seriously I doubted what you said... got home sat down and read it.. blew my fucking mind. Lol. Thanks user.

Jesus fuck people. One chart is total amount of slaves and the other is total amount of free coloureds with slave holders and non slave holdees included.

All user did was basic subtraction and addition which seems to be more than reddit can figure out.

See pic related

Slaves were for the rich and wealthy. The common man would maybe bring on an indentured servant which was common in the north. The civil war was sparked by the rich slave owners chimping out over the fact that theyd have to pay actual workers.

www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1860a.zip

www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial/documents/1860b.zip

Bump for interest.

>total amount of free coloureds with slave holders and non slave holdees included

Included, but not broken out into numbers.

>explain

What is 40% of 262,000?

newobserveronline.com/hidden-facts-about-slavery-in-america/

no it is free colored people divided into whether they are in slave-holding or free STATS as their residence. Says nothing about Blacks owning slaves.

Then what the fuck is the second chart talking about? The one that talks about slaveholders in the United States and it's territories? Why do they use the same term to represent two different things?

I know, it's hard to read factual evidence at times.

I'm a data analyst at a Fortune 500 company. I live on Zero Hedge and post here when I'm not busy. I have sifted through the information for the past 24 hours. In order to ensure proper vigilance and attention to detail I consumed 200 mg of Adderall spaced out in a bi-hourly schedule. I also have been microdosing LSD for the past three years.

I can unequivocally say that there is absolutely nothing profound within this information. It is insubstantial at best, and outright exaggerations bordering on slander at worst.

It would likely be in everyone's best interest to focus on more pertinent issues as opposed to getting lost in a web of obfuscation.

I keep seeing these things lying around. I wonder who is behind them:

((()))

Fuck off share blue.

One chart is simply the number of Blacks and mulattos in free and slave states and the other is slaveholders numbers by state. I was confused at first too.

Feel free to share any evidence on the subject you might have.

Like I'm going to believe some highsec miner faggot

Go back to your multibox

Remember user EVERY black history month is pointing out the bullshit of black history month month.

See

>(((white)))
this

As people have already pointed out, youre misreading the label.

But if you took the time to even think this over critically youd realize your retardation: it costs a lot of money to own slaves yet somehow white people make up only 32% of the slaveholding class in 1860s America, totally out of line with the demographics

why did that get deleted? what did it say?

Why would they use the same term to denote two different concepts?

I missed the 7 on the end of the post number

Wtf bump

They didn't. They listed slaveholders (persons) and slaveholding states.

Like it says on the chart.

So if there is an aggregate amount of 384k slave holders in the us. And another chart says 155k free blacks were slave holders...they didn't hold slaves?

>another chart says 155k free blacks were slave holders

No, it doesn't. That was the number of free blacks in slaveholding states.

Like it says on the chart.

Oh my god. I'm literally retarded.

I know. Faggot.

:P

Well time to send some retraction texts. Fuck.

>trying to convince others that niggers ain't shit

Why

You've misunderstood these charts user, I recommend re-reading them.

>Www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html

You're right. This thread is a case of /pol confirmation bias.

>Sup Forums in charge of science

bump

Yeah...already conceded that I was retarded, muhamad. How's your parliament doing?