Uncomfortable Conversations with a Black man

[Vixen]

So there's the good way to do slavery and the bad way to do slavery and we did it the bad way?


Yes, I'm sure that the methods Africans used to break people's will to resist while marching them hundreds of miles from the interior of Africa to the coast was mostly humane.


Letting men and women engage in sexual activity was definitely wrong, considering how easy it is to prevent. If we couldn't stop them from fornicating the least we could have done is terminate the pregnancy or simply toss the baby onto the bonfire after it was born.


What do you expect? If I buy a $40,000 automobile I'm not going to try to maintain it. I run it into the ground as quickly as I can. Why would I treat a slave any differently?



Of all the Africans who were brought to the New World against their will, the five percent who ended up in British North America (the rest going to the Caribbean or Central/South America) today enjoy a higher standard of living than any other African diaspora population anywhere in the world and anywhere in Africa itself. If life here in the United States is so oppressive, maybe they should consider going back so we don't hurt them any more.

Oh please. So imagine you kidnapped some random individuals (simply because you could) and forced them to work for you for free for the rest of their lives, and their children and children's children in enforced imprisonment on your 'plantation'. You become very wealthy from their labour and produce, as do your children and children's children, whilst your slaves and their children and children's children continue to be enslaved, unfree and legally your 'property', which you pass on as chattels to your heirs and they to theirs.

So a few generations from now you smugly note that your own enjoy comfortable lives in the best parts of town, whilst the slaves - or by now ex-slaves - live in the run down part of town.

How insulting is it for you to claim they should be grateful to be living there because their ethnic kin in another country all together are worse off (a country in Africa probably stripped of its gold diamond and ivory along with its strongest and fittest all those generations ago).

Sure it is understandable you are Mr Smug and rationalise this by inventing myths about how your slaves are inferior and your own superior.

I get that white supremacists want to hang on to this social position of having privilege off the backs of enslaved others but please don't insult our intelligence by making 'they deserve it'-type claims whilst failing to acknowledge the wrongs done.

 

[Thermal]

Oh please. So imagine you kidnapped some random individuals (simply because you could) and forced them to work for you for free for the rest of their lives, and their children and children's children in enforced imprisonment on your 'plantation'. You become very wealthy from their labour and produce, as do your children and children's children, whilst your slaves and their children and children's children continue to be enslaved, unfree and legally your 'property', which you pass on as chattels to your heirs and they to theirs.

So a few generations from now you smugly note that your own enjoy comfortable lives in the best parts of town, whilst the slaves - or by now ex-slaves - live in the run down part of town.

How insulting is it for you to claim they should be grateful to be living there because their ethnic kin in another country all together are worse off (a country in Africa probably stripped of its gold diamond and ivory along with its strongest and fittest all those generations ago).

Sure it is understandable you are Mr Smug and rationalise this by inventing myths about how your slaves are inferior and your own superior.

I get that white supremacists want to hang on to this social position of having privilege off the backs of enslaved others but please don't insult our intelligence by making 'they deserve it'-type claims whilst failing to acknowledge the wrongs done.

Uh huh. Now imagine that one side of your family fought in the Civil War and died for the Union Army, and the other side came over in the 20th Century. No slavers on either side, traced back to the Old Country. Then have Acho and the other woman tell you how much you deserve to have them be violent to you. Swish that around in your mouth for a bit. Taste like rationality?

 

[CaptainHowdy]

Oh please. So imagine you kidnapped some random individuals (simply because you could) and forced them to work for you for free for the rest of their lives, and their children and children's children in enforced imprisonment on your 'plantation'. You become very wealthy from their labour and produce, as do your children and children's children, whilst your slaves and their children and children's children continue to be enslaved, unfree and legally your 'property', which you pass on as chattels to your heirs and they to theirs.

That is a scenario that played out almost nowhere in the real world. Europeans didn't sail down to Africa and go ashore and kidnap Africans. Africans enslaved other Africans and brought them to the coast where Europeans exchanged fermented beverages and shiny objects for them. This system was wrong. The indigenous European Christian people recognized it was wrong which is why they abolished it in the parts of the world which they controlled. Meanwhile, Africans are still practicing slavery.

So a few generations from now you smugly note that your own enjoy comfortable lives in the best parts of town, whilst the slaves - or by now ex-slaves - live in the run down part of town.

How insulting is it for you to claim they should be grateful to be living there because their ethnic kin in another country all together are worse off (a country in Africa probably stripped of its gold diamond and ivory along with its strongest and fittest all those generations ago).

Sure it is understandable you are Mr Smug and rationalise this by inventing myths about how your slaves are inferior and your own superior.

I get that white supremacists want to hang on to this social position of having privilege off the backs of enslaved others but please don't insult our intelligence by making 'they deserve it'-type claims whilst failing to acknowledge the wrongs done.

Nobody says anybody deserves to be poor. But American descendants of slavery blame their condition today on the legacy of slavery. The problem is that there aren't any former slaves alive anymore. The vast majority of people in the United States are descended from people who arrived here after slavery was abolished. What does the recent arrival from Thailand owe black people? What does the Paki at the cash register in 7-11 owe black people? What about the Brahmin managing the Motel 6?

Black people are unhappy with their lot in life and believe they are owed something because of the legacy of slavery. But black people are unhappy with their lot in life everywhere they live. I have no idea what France or Germany is suppose to do to make their black citizens happy given there's no legacy of slavery or Jim Crow there. In the United States we have the unique ability to rectify the wrongs we have inflicted on black people. We can reverse the legacy of slavery by undoing it. But for the long abolished slave trade, the black people in the United States would have been born in Africa. The way to make the black community whole would be to send them back to Africa. That is all we owe any of them. If they want to stay, they can. But they have to behave.

You never answered why you think it is that black people always end up at the bottom of socioeconomic scale no matter where in the world they have settled. I'm sure I can guess what your explanation is and I'll bet it's not the same reason for why Jews and Chinese always seem to end up at the top.

 

[CaptainHowdy]

double post

 

[theprestige]

That is a scenario that played out almost nowhere in the real world. Europeans didn't sail down to Africa and go ashore and kidnap Africans. Africans enslaved other Africans and brought them to the coast where Europeans exchanged fermented beverages and shiny objects for them. This system was wrong. The indigenous European Christian people recognized it was wrong which is why they abolished it in the parts of the world which they controlled. Meanwhile, Africans are still practicing slavery.



Nobody says anybody deserves to be poor. But American descendants of slavery blame their condition today on the legacy of slavery. The problem is that there aren't any former slaves alive anymore. The vast majority of people in the United States are descended from people who arrived here after slavery was abolished. What does the recent arrival from Thailand owe black people? What does the Paki at the cash register in 7-11 owe black people? What about the Brahmin managing the Motel 6?

Black people are unhappy with their lot in life and believe they are owed something because of the legacy of slavery. But black people are unhappy with their lot in life everywhere they live. I have no idea what France or Germany is suppose to do to make their black citizens happy given there's no legacy of slavery or Jim Crow there. In the United States we have the unique ability to rectify the wrongs we have inflicted on black people. We can reverse the legacy of slavery by undoing it. But for the long abolished slave trade, the black people in the United States would have been born in Africa. The way to make the black community whole would be to send them back to Africa. That is all we owe any of them. If they want to stay, they can. But they have to behave.

You never answered why you think it is that black people always end up at the bottom of socioeconomic scale no matter where in the world they have settled. I'm sure I can guess what your explanation is and I'll bet it's not the same reason for why Jews and Chinese always seem to end up at the top.

No. There is a whole legacy of racism., which extends for generations past the institution of slavery and its abolition. Jim Crow. Redlining. Discrimination fine and gross, explicit and implicit. Just dealing a generation of black Americans out of home ownership and the real estate market, by itself, goes a long way to explaining black poverty today. After slavery ended, two generations of white Americans worked hard to make sure blacks continued to be second class citizens. And they were far too successful. Your rhetoric on this subject is morally repugnant.

 

[Brainster]

No. There is a whole legacy of racism., which extends for generations past the institution of slavery and its abolition. Jim Crow. Redlining. Discrimination fine and gross, explicit and implicit. Just dealing a generation of black Americans out of home ownership and the real estate market, by itself, goes a long way to explaining black poverty today. After slavery ended, two generations of white Americans worked hard to make sure blacks continued to be second class citizens. And they were far too successful. Your rhetoric on this subject is morally repugnant.

I'm against reparations for slavery, but I think there is a better argument for reparations for segregation and Jim Crow; in those cases you have people still living who had to endure it.

 

[Vixen]

Uh huh. Now imagine that one side of your family fought in the Civil War and died for the Union Army, and the other side came over in the 20th Century. No slavers on either side, traced back to the Old Country. Then have Acho and the other woman tell you how much you deserve to have them be violent to you. Swish that around in your mouth for a bit. Taste like rationality?

Your response is a classic evasion of the racism question. When the topic of racism arises people almost reflexively respond in one of the following ways:

• I am of Italian/Spanish descent: my ancestors knew all about being picked on [translated =therefore I am exonerated]
• I have red hair and I have also been picked on but who's speaking up for me? [= this should be all about me]
• I am a nice person. How dare yoiu call me a racist. [= "only nasty people are racist"]
• J Sainsbury has brought out a Christmas Advert featuring a Black family [= 'This doesn't represent me. This is diversity gone mad. I am never going to shop at Sainsbury again".]
• I have Black friends /Black family members [= so the issue of racism has nothing to do with me]
• "These people have brought it on themselves" [= therefore the issue of racism is moot]
• "What about Black people committing crimes against Whites?" [=therefore I don't need to bother with this topic]
• What about the Irish/the Welsh/the Scottish/the French/the Germans/the Working Classes? [=ditto]
• "What about me? I am low paid, my life is ****, I live in a hovel" [= I am exonerated from bothering about the racism topic]
• "Look at Black people in the jungle in Africa. That is how they live. White supremacy is natural." [= I am openly racist so the topic doesn't apply to me.]
• I will remain silent on this topic [= I stand in solidarity with White Supremacy]

What happens is that people evade the topic for the one or any of the above reasons. In other words, people support White Supremacists but without admitting it.

 

[Vixen]

That is a scenario that played out almost nowhere in the real world. Europeans didn't sail down to Africa and go ashore and kidnap Africans. Africans enslaved other Africans and brought them to the coast where Europeans exchanged fermented beverages and shiny objects for them. This system was wrong. The indigenous European Christian people recognized it was wrong which is why they abolished it in the parts of the world which they controlled. Meanwhile, Africans are still practicing slavery.



Nobody says anybody deserves to be poor. But American descendants of slavery blame their condition today on the legacy of slavery. The problem is that there aren't any former slaves alive anymore. The vast majority of people in the United States are descended from people who arrived here after slavery was abolished. What does the recent arrival from Thailand owe black people? What does the Paki at the cash register in 7-11 owe black people? What about the Brahmin managing the Motel 6?

Black people are unhappy with their lot in life and believe they are owed something because of the legacy of slavery. But black people are unhappy with their lot in life everywhere they live. I have no idea what France or Germany is suppose to do to make their black citizens happy given there's no legacy of slavery or Jim Crow there. In the United States we have the unique ability to rectify the wrongs we have inflicted on black people. We can reverse the legacy of slavery by undoing it. But for the long abolished slave trade, the black people in the United States would have been born in Africa. The way to make the black community whole would be to send them back to Africa. That is all we owe any of them. If they want to stay, they can. But they have to behave.

You never answered why you think it is that black people always end up at the bottom of socioeconomic scale no matter where in the world they have settled. I'm sure I can guess what your explanation is and I'll bet it's not the same reason for why Jews and Chinese always seem to end up at the top.

I disagree with you. I believe any African-American who can prove descendance from slavery should get reparation. Jews, gypsies, or others should get reparation from the German state if their ancestors came from any of the regions affected by the mass genocide perpetrated by the Nazi regime. People affected by war crimes should get reparation from the state that perpetrated it against them. IMV people who argue as Captain Howdy are just simply arguing in solidarity with the perpetrators.

 

[cullennz]

Your response is a classic evasion of the racism question. When the topic of racism arises people almost reflexively respond in one of the following ways:

• I am of Italian/Spanish descent: my ancestors knew all about being picked on [translated =therefore I am exonerated]
• I have red hair and I have also been picked on but who's speaking up for me? [= this should be all about me]
• I am a nice person. How dare yoiu call me a racist. [= "only nasty people are racist"]
• J Sainsbury has brought out a Christmas Advert featuring a Black family [= 'This doesn't represent me. This is diversity gone mad. I am never going to shop at Sainsbury again".]
• I have Black friends /Black family members [= so the issue of racism has nothing to do with me]
• "These people have brought it on themselves" [= therefore the issue of racism is moot]
• "What about Black people committing crimes against Whites?" [=therefore I don't need to bother with this topic]
• What about the Irish/the Welsh/the Scottish/the French/the Germans/the Working Classes? [=ditto]
• "What about me? I am low paid, my life is ****, I live in a hovel" [= I am exonerated from bothering about the racism topic]
• "Look at Black people in the jungle in Africa. That is how they live. White supremacy is natural." [= I am openly racist so the topic doesn't apply to me.]
• I will remain silent on this topic [= I stand in solidarity with White Supremacy]

What happens is that people evade the topic for the one or any of the above reasons. In other words, people support White Supremacists but without admitting it.

This has to be one of the more silly posts I have seen on here. But realise they are probably thinking everything revolves around US history.

 

[bluesjnr]

Your response is a classic evasion of the racism question. When the topic of racism arises people almost reflexively respond in one of the following ways:

• I am of Italian/Spanish descent: my ancestors knew all about being picked on [translated =therefore I am exonerated]
• I have red hair and I have also been picked on but who's speaking up for me? [= this should be all about me]
• I am a nice person. How dare yoiu call me a racist. [= "only nasty people are racist"]
• J Sainsbury has brought out a Christmas Advert featuring a Black family [= 'This doesn't represent me. This is diversity gone mad. I am never going to shop at Sainsbury again".]
• I have Black friends /Black family members [= so the issue of racism has nothing to do with me]
• "These people have brought it on themselves" [= therefore the issue of racism is moot]
• "What about Black people committing crimes against Whites?" [=therefore I don't need to bother with this topic]
• What about the Irish/the Welsh/the Scottish/the French/the Germans/the Working Classes? [=ditto]
• "What about me? I am low paid, my life is ****, I live in a hovel" [= I am exonerated from bothering about the racism topic]
• "Look at Black people in the jungle in Africa. That is how they live. White supremacy is natural." [= I am openly racist so the topic doesn't apply to me.]
• I will remain silent on this topic [= I stand in solidarity with White Supremacy]

What happens is that people evade the topic for the one or any of the above reasons. In other words, people support White Supremacists but without admitting it.

This has to be one of the more silly posts I have seen on here. But realise they are probably thinking everything revolves around US history.

To be absolutely fair it's not all silly and some of it hits the nail right on the head. Pity some of the "translations" and the highlighted meant that the poster hit their, metaphorical, thumb though.

 

[dann]

This has to be one of the more silly posts I have seen on here. But realise they are probably thinking everything revolves around US history.

= You didn't like it but can't think of an argument against it.

 

[Thermal]

Your response is a classic evasion of the racism question. When the topic of racism arises people almost reflexively respond in one of the following ways:

• I am of Italian/Spanish descent: my ancestors knew all about being picked on [translated =therefore I am exonerated]
• I have red hair and I have also been picked on but who's speaking up for me? [= this should be all about me]
• I am a nice person. How dare yoiu call me a racist. [= "only nasty people are racist"]
• J Sainsbury has brought out a Christmas Advert featuring a Black family [= 'This doesn't represent me. This is diversity gone mad. I am never going to shop at Sainsbury again".]
• I have Black friends /Black family members [= so the issue of racism has nothing to do with me]
• "These people have brought it on themselves" [= therefore the issue of racism is moot]
• "What about Black people committing crimes against Whites?" [=therefore I don't need to bother with this topic]
• What about the Irish/the Welsh/the Scottish/the French/the Germans/the Working Classes? [=ditto]
• "What about me? I am low paid, my life is ****, I live in a hovel" [= I am exonerated from bothering about the racism topic]
• "Look at Black people in the jungle in Africa. That is how they live. White supremacy is natural." [= I am openly racist so the topic doesn't apply to me.]
• I will remain silent on this topic [= I stand in solidarity with White Supremacy]

What happens is that people evade the topic for the one or any of the above reasons. In other words, people support White Supremacists but without admitting it.

I...I don't think you understand what the topic is.

You seem to think I am 'evading' the subject of racism. Should you trouble yourself to catch up on the thread, we are discussing it squarely. Uncomfortably, as it were.

The thread has two videos prompting much of the discussion. In the OP, Acho gives the flat-out dumbest and most entitled analogy for justifying rioting that I ever heard. "We warned you" is not a justification for burning down a neighborhood. Unless you think those shop owners were directly responsible for your plight. In the second video, the woman's explanations were far dumber and more entitled. Both were very racist in their justifications. Obnoxiously so.

I am of the opinion that their excuses for destroying others' property and doing violence against others are appalling. Some rioting, like the burning of the third precinct in Minneapolis, are understandable. But Acho and more particularly the woman in the second video are generalizing rioting against basically everyone, friend or foe, in the name of their entitled racism.

And that is the spirit in which I respond. Her burning down a Target now has to do with her racism, fueled by other racists in other times and places. It has to do with her doing violence against random strangers because she thinks she deserves to. Even though the properties she burns down may be owned by people who have worked their whole lives for racial equality. She doesn't care, such is the degree of her racist entitlement. To which I say, **** her.

Americans are still obviously dealing with the ripples from slavery. But Acho and the woman want to cause new ripples of their own against random white people. That's not ok. At all.

 

[bluesjnr]

I...I don't think you understand what the topic is.

You seem to think I am 'evading' the subject of racism. Should you trouble yourself to catch up on the thread, we are discussing it squarely. Uncomfortably, as it were.

The thread has two videos prompting much of the discussion. In the OP, Acho gives the flat-out dumbest and most entitled analogy for justifying rioting that I ever heard. "We warned you" is not a justification for burning down a neighborhood. Unless you think those shop owners were directly responsible for your plight. In the second video, the woman's explanations were far dumber and more entitled. Both were very racist in their justifications. Obnoxiously so.

I am of the opinion that their excuses for destroying others' property and doing violence against others are appalling. Some rioting, like the burning of the third precinct in Minneapolis, are understandable. But Acho and more particularly the woman in the second video are generalizing rioting against basically everyone, friend or foe, in the name of their entitled racism.

And that is the spirit in which I respond. Her burning down a Target now has to do with her racism, fueled by other racists in other times and places. It has to do with her doing violence against random strangers because she thinks she deserves to. Even though the properties she burns down may be owned by people who have worked their whole lives for racial equality. She doesn't care, such is the degree of her racist entitlement. To which I say, **** her.

Americans are still obviously dealing with the ripples from slavery. But Acho and the woman want to cause new ripples of their own against random white people. That's not ok. At all.

I'm afraid you're wasting pixels. Your stance = standing in solidarity with White Supremacy (apparently).

No ground will be given by the wokescolds.

GET OUT OF THE WAY!

 

[Thermal]

I'm afraid you're wasting pixels. Your stance = standing in solidarity with White Supremacy (apparently).

No ground will be given by the wokescolds.

GET OUT OF THE WAY!

Oddly enough, Vixen was silent on the actual thread topic, and since handwaving and ignoring the subject should be considered substantive silence on the subject, Vixen stands in solidarity with white supremacists, by their own argument. Funny old world.

 

[Emily's Cat]

In other words, people support White Supremacists but without admitting it.

That's very questionable logic there. It doesn't allow for any white person to actually NOT support white supremacism. It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't set-up.

 

[Emily's Cat]

I disagree with you. I believe any African-American who can prove descendance from slavery should get reparation

Okay... from whom?

And do they need to be able to prove dependency from slaves in the US after the US declared independence? What if they're descended from Caribbean our south American slaves?

What about my sister, who is mixed? On her father's side, they are very probably descended from slaves, but are also descended from Native American slavers. On our mother's side, she's descended from early settlers who owned slaves, but also from early Irish immigrants who were slaves. How much reparations is she due? Is it prorated?

 

[Distracted1]

I disagree with you. I believe any African-American who can prove descendance from slavery should get reparation. Jews, gypsies, or others should get reparation from the German state if their ancestors came from any of the regions affected by the mass genocide perpetrated by the Nazi regime. People affected by war crimes should get reparation from the state that perpetrated it against them. IMV people who argue as Captain Howdy are just simply arguing in solidarity with the perpetrators.

Since "The State" that practiced chattel slavery in North America for the preponderance of its existence was England, is Great Britain on the hook for reparations to descendants of British slaves now citizens of the U.S.?

 

[Distracted1]

Your response is a classic evasion of the racism question. When the topic of racism arises people almost reflexively respond in one of the following ways:

• I am of Italian/Spanish descent: my ancestors knew all about being picked on [translated =therefore I am exonerated]
• I have red hair and I have also been picked on but who's speaking up for me? [= this should be all about me]
• I am a nice person. How dare yoiu call me a racist. [= "only nasty people are racist"]
• J Sainsbury has brought out a Christmas Advert featuring a Black family [= 'This doesn't represent me. This is diversity gone mad. I am never going to shop at Sainsbury again".]
• I have Black friends /Black family members [= so the issue of racism has nothing to do with me]
• "These people have brought it on themselves" [= therefore the issue of racism is moot]
• "What about Black people committing crimes against Whites?" [=therefore I don't need to bother with this topic]
• What about the Irish/the Welsh/the Scottish/the French/the Germans/the Working Classes? [=ditto]
• "What about me? I am low paid, my life is ****, I live in a hovel" [= I am exonerated from bothering about the racism topic]
• "Look at Black people in the jungle in Africa. That is how they live. White supremacy is natural." [= I am openly racist so the topic doesn't apply to me.]
• I will remain silent on this topic [= I stand in solidarity with White Supremacy]

What happens is that people evade the topic for the one or any of the above reasons. In other words, people support White Supremacists but without admitting it.

My own classic evasion of the issue is to ask that there first be an agreed-upon, or working, definition of what "racism" is.

If one can be held accountable for being a racist, I do not think it too much to require that the one doing the accounting be able to state in some kind of clear fashion what is- and is not- "racism". Absent that, it is difficult for me to take assertions that any particular set of circumstances is a result of "racism" as seriously as they might deserve to be.

 

[Mumbles]

Okay... from whom?

From the various US governments and businesses that profited from such - although the US also owes for the continued discrimination well into the 1960s and 1970s - which you'll note includes many people still living who were directly affected.

(Note that when some other family immigrated is not important, as they are not being held liable - despite almost certainly profiting directly from the wholesale theft of black and Native wealth in the US)

What about my sister, who is mixed? On her father's side, they are very probably descended from slaves, but are also descended from Native American slavers. On our mother's side, she's descended from early settlers who owned slaves, but also from early Irish immigrants who were slaves. How much reparations is she due? Is it prorated?

For reference, Irish immigrants to the US were, as a rule, not enslaved at any point in US history. And Native Americans obviously have separate claims to the US government which strongly parallel, though are not identical to, those of black Americans.

 

[Emily's Cat]

From the various US governments and businesses that profited from such - although the US also owes for the continued discrimination well into the 1960s and 1970s - which you'll note includes many people still living who were directly affected.

And how will the funds for that be produced?

For reference, Irish immigrants to the US were, as a rule, not enslaved at any point in US history. And Native Americans obviously have separate claims to the US government which strongly parallel, though are not identical to, those of black Americans.

Okay then... Irish indentured servants who were shipped to the US against their will.