Michael Johnson says Slave Breeding led to Slavery Descendants being better athletes

150+ years (at least) is a few generations?

 

CaseyH, where do you stand on the proposition that slave-owners tried to selectively breed their slaves? In this earlier comment, you seemed to be implicitly be denying the practice:

I want to correct this misconception on your part so that we can all be on the same page. So, did I satisfy your need for proof or do you still maintain that slave owners did not try to select for more fit slaves?

 

Not really. The reason stated was he was handsome. That just implies he was chosen because it was easier for him to father babies.

 

Look, I was operating under the assumption that you were not pre-disposed to disbelieving either way that slaves owners have selectively bred their slaves or never selectively bred their slaves, but I guess I was wrong. You have reached an incorrect implication by not reading the first part of that quote and then reading the second sentence referencing handsome. So here is the first part of the quote:

The implication of the statement read as a whole is that slave owners were engaged in selective breeding of slaves. In this case, they cared to breed healthy male slaves with healthy female slaves.

Jefferson's Letter to Joel Yancey January 17th 1819:

Referenced in The Slave's Story - Jefferson's Family (PBS Frontline)

Various interviews with former slaves conducted by the Federal Writer's Project, including the interview with Jeptha Choice, indicate that slave owners cared which slaves bred with which slaves. Additionally, Thomas Jefferson's letters indicate that they cared about the production and breeding of slaves, for profit. Putting these two together it seems fairly certain that slave owners selectively bred slaves. Of course we can never be 100% certain because slaves don't produce memoirs and many documents from the era have not been preserved, but it seems that we can say with high certainty that some slave owners selectively bred slaves. Is this enough for you to get beyond your tendency toward denial?

 

I'm only 5 generations removed from an ancestor who came directly from the continent.

 

Chris Rock does a good job of breaking Johnson's point down in a humorous way. (NSFW)

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/DLKvYB7CeAY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Whatever

Not in order to get super slaves. They just wanted more slaves. Young and healthy are the two best factors in determining fertility. Nothing at all indicates super slaves.

Indicates slaves were the new crop after importation was prohibited. It says nothing of super slaves.

Tendency for denial? My stance all along along has been
1. if they tried to create super slaves it wouldn't have worked
2. I haven't seen any evidence they tried

there are many memoirs and first hand accounts from slaves. Furthermore rich owners had written correspondence. Any efforts in this realm would have been documented. We have been breeding for thousands of years, if they did it at that time it would not have been taboo at all. Certainly not enough to hide, and if it happened there would have been talk about it.

People in this thread are acting like it factually 100% happened. Lets see some evidence.

 

That's just someone with the social license to belittle his own race and validate his audience's latent bigotry in exchange for status and income. It's an offensive, limiting slur that under the guise of self-deprecation appears insightful and satirical.