> Not all suffered the same slavery we know today.

What is the "slavery we know today"?

Do you mean "American slavery as we understand it today", or "Slavery in the current day"? If the former, then how is the passage you quoted different from our understanding of American slavery? Do you mean to say it was better, worse, or in some other way different?

Charlotte's family weren't the well known field slaves or house slaves. They were tenants, renting their own lives from their legal owner for $2/week.

What does it even mean to rent from somebody that owns you?

Imagine taxation, or inflation of a fiat currency with legal tender laws forcing acceptance.

It is extremely offensive to compare chattel slavery with living in a society that requires you to pay taxes.

"Offensive" means nothing today, and I'd suggest you stop allowing yourself and others to waste your time with it.

Have you actually compared the two? You'll notice one is far more insidious if you do.

Also, don't conveniently leave out the inflation of the world reserve fiat global enslavement system.

I know we can always opt to live in the woods, and barter, but you've got to take both into consideration to honestly consider what it is I said.

Specifically slavery was more varied than "American slavery as we understand it today." The passage I quoted is different, in that it departs from the traditional model of plantation based, field labor slavery. It is still reprehensible exploitation, of course. It's just important to remember/question how diverse people's experiences actually were.

I’m trying to see something:

“Not all suffered the same Holocaust we know today. It’s just important to remember/question how diverse people’s Holocaust experiences actually were.”

Maybe it’s just me but these type of statements seem to miss the point. Given the deplorable state of American understanding of slavery, Reconstruction, the state-sanctioned apartheid that only ended a few decades ago, and all its effects that continue to reverberate, I don’t think “a nuanced understanding” of slavery is really what’s called for. The evidence suggests that most Americans never even learned the ABCs of slavery and its effects.

The parent comment you're responding to didn't downplay slavery in any way, nor did they say that this person had it better or worse. Just that this person's experience was different. There's nothing wrong with acknowledging that slavery didn't always look the same as we may imagine. There were varying experiences. It's history.

Thank you! You summed up my feelings (about the comment you responded to), perfectly!

Because a proportion of America has been poorly educated, it's inappropriate to interrogate the primary sources slaves left behind? I don't follow.

Yeah, obviously we need to fix the appalling state of our Civil War and slavery history in this country.

Does the account you posted here resemble most of the chronicled experiences you’ve encountered?

Nope! Never said it did. EDIT: Literally just picked a random (that I thought would fit in the space I had--didn't want to go over-long) passage from the Freedman's interviews section of the book.