Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 789
Results 81 to 84 of 84

Thread: Militant Atheism

  1. #81
    tWebber carpedm9587's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    12,605
    Amen (Given)
    26
    Amen (Received)
    1096
    Quote Originally Posted by tabibito View Post
    Seems to be some conflation here of "slavery" and "racism." For the most part, slave owners didn't care about the race of their slaves - they were as happy to have white slaves as black (except that white slaves tended to be more expensive and in shorter supply.) Nor was it whites alone who owned slaves, there were also black slave-owners. And just as an aside - women were more aggressively opposed to manumission of slaves than were men (on average).
    Tab, with all due respect, that there were a few black slaveholders (and there have been black slaveholders in history) and that there were a few white slaves as well does not alter the place slavery played in American history and the history of racism. IMO, it's a sidetrack. Slavery was not a "one issue" thing across the board. It had racist roots in the belief many slaveholders had that black people were simply inferior. It had broad economic roots in that it represented a massive pool of inexpensive labor. It was justified economically, religiously, and by pretty much any other means the people who engaged in it could rationalize their choices. And it has had lingering effects that have rippled down into the modern day, effects that many, today, deny even exist. Most of these issues have, IMO, been very poorly addressed, or not addressed at all.

    For me - the issue is not "I am guilty and need to do something about it." It is "there is an ongoing injustice at play, and I would like to contribute to ending it." Racism and its legacy are only one such injustice. Gender discrimination, age discrimination, and all of the other ways we systemically undermine others should all be given their due attention.
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

  2. Amen shunyadragon amen'd this post.
  3. #82
    tWebber tabibito's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    DownUnder
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,958
    Amen (Given)
    202
    Amen (Received)
    852
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    Tab, with all due respect, that there were a few black slaveholders (and there have been black slaveholders in history) and that there were a few white slaves as well does not alter the place slavery played in American history and the history of racism. IMO, it's a sidetrack. Slavery was not a "one issue" thing across the board. It had racist roots in the belief many slaveholders had that black people were simply inferior. It had broad economic roots in that it represented a massive pool of inexpensive labor. It was justified economically, religiously, and by pretty much any other means the people who engaged in it could rationalize their choices. And it has had lingering effects that have rippled down into the modern day, effects that many, today, deny even exist. Most of these issues have, IMO, been very poorly addressed, or not addressed at all.

    For me - the issue is not "I am guilty and need to do something about it." It is "there is an ongoing injustice at play, and I would like to contribute to ending it." Racism and its legacy are only one such injustice. Gender discrimination, age discrimination, and all of the other ways we systemically undermine others should all be given their due attention.

    As I have commented before - The slavers (for the most part) bought slaves from traders and resold them. The people the slavers bought them from were of the same race (for the most part) as the slaves ... that is, they were selling their own people into slavery. Their trade had roots in history extending to well before white slavers started buying from them. While white societies have banned slavery, the descendants of the black slavers continue the trade, primarily with certain countries in the Middle East. So - due attention has its appropriate territory.

    that there were a few black slaveholders (and there have been black slaveholders in history) and it continues through the present ... American society's slave holdings have been relegated to history - few black slave-holders on American territory, but elsewhere in the world?
    and that there were a few white slaves as well ... There were significantly more than a few; they were mostly called indentured labourers.
    does not alter the place slavery played in American history ... past history
    and the history of racism ... there are as many black racists as there are white (and other colours to boot).
    1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

  4. #83
    tWebber carpedm9587's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    12,605
    Amen (Given)
    26
    Amen (Received)
    1096
    Quote Originally Posted by tabibito View Post
    For me - the issue is not "I am guilty and need to do something about it." It is "there is an ongoing injustice at play, and I would like to contribute to ending it." Racism and its legacy are only one such injustice. Gender discrimination, age discrimination, and all of the other ways we systemically undermine others should all be given their due attention.
    I cannot begin to tell you how refreshing it is to hear that from someone on this site and (generally) from the right. Too often what I hear is denial the situations exist (e.g., white privilege, male privilege, youth privilege, etc.) and insistence that those of us sensitive to these issues are just trying to make everyone feel guilty.

    Quote Originally Posted by tabibito View Post
    As I have commented before - The slavers (for the most part) bought slaves from traders and resold them. The people the slavers bought them from were of the same race (for the most part) as the slaves ... that is, they were selling their own people into slavery. Their trade had roots in history extending to well before white slavers started buying from them. While white societies have banned slavery, the descendants of the black slavers continue the trade, primarily with certain countries in the Middle East. So - due attention has its appropriate territory.
    This I cannot comment on at present, other than to note it at least partially does not align with what I think I know. But I will dig around and see what I can find. While I know some of this (traders being of the same race as the traded) existed in the 1400s-1800s, my understanding was that the vast majority of slaving came from white raids on black villages throughout Africa (and other places). But I have to admit that I learned much of that in school, which gave us Columbus as a hero, and a great deal of other "cleaned" history. So...I'll put any further response on hold until I have a chance to look into it. That it is happening today I absolutely agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by tabibito View Post
    that there were a few black slaveholders (and there have been black slaveholders in history) and it continues through the present ... American society's slave holdings have been relegated to history - few black slave-holders on American territory, but elsewhere in the world?
    So this may be out disconnect. My comments were about American slavery and the impact on racism and racial differences through to the present. I was not making global statements.

    Quote Originally Posted by tabibito View Post
    and that there were a few white slaves as well ... There were significantly more than a few; they were mostly called indentured labourers.
    This is another distinction. Indentured laborers fall along a spectrum. At one end are those who were fairly treated and it provided a mechanism by which they could achieve a goal (i.e., come to America, secure land, etc.). At the other are those who were unscrupulously locked in indefinite servitude by the terms of the indenture - making them no better than slaves. Between those two extremes lay a lot of variation. So I don't simply equate indentured servitude with slavery.

    And how much difference is there, I wonder, between abusive indentured servitude, and the bank that knowingly grants a mortgage to someone who cannot afford it, then waits for them to fail and repossesses their home, leaving them bankrupt and (potentially) homeless?

    Quote Originally Posted by tabibito View Post
    does not alter the place slavery played in American history ... past history
    First - "past history" is redundant.
    Second, I'm not sure what your point is.

    Quote Originally Posted by tabibito View Post
    and the history of racism ... there are as many black racists as there are white (and other colours to boot).
    Racism is not limited to any one race. But, in my experience, most "black racism" (again, speaking about America) is not "blacks are superior to whites" so much as it is an angry response to the lot the black person in America has had to face for so many centuries. While it has become significantly better in the modern day, the damages resulting from all those decades of broad-based racism and the ongoing reality of systemic racism still results in (on average) a significant gap between the white experience and the black experience. That doesn't make black racism right, but I don't see it as the same as white racism.
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

  5. #84
    tWebber tabibito's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    DownUnder
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,958
    Amen (Given)
    202
    Amen (Received)
    852
    Quote Originally Posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    I cannot begin to tell you how refreshing it is to hear that from someone on this site and (generally) from the right. Too often what I hear is denial the situations exist (e.g., white privilege, male privilege, youth privilege, etc.) and insistence that those of us sensitive to these issues are just trying to make everyone feel guilty.
    Extend the list - female privilege, black privilege etc. which don't get the kind of recognition that other privileges do. Women engage in domestic violence - the stereotypical "hen-pecked husband" is no less the victim of domestic violence than the "rooster pecked wife," just as one example. Female sex predators are not unknown, but there's always an excuse for why they aren't really the perpetrators, just victims of something else (male perpetrators generally have similar histories as victims.)

    This I cannot comment on at present, other than to note it at least partially does not align with what I think I know. But I will dig around and see what I can find. While I know some of this (traders being of the same race as the traded) existed in the 1400s-1800s, my understanding was that the vast majority of slaving came from white raids on black villages throughout Africa (and other places). But I have to admit that I learned much of that in school, which gave us Columbus as a hero, and a great deal of other "cleaned" history. So...I'll put any further response on hold until I have a chance to look into it. That it is happening today I absolutely agree.
    Simple economics - it was easier and cheaper to buy from established slave traders than to mount their own slave hunting expeditions. (of course, slave hunting was preferable to having no slaves)

    So this may be out disconnect. My comments were about American slavery and the impact on racism and racial differences through to the present. I was not making global statements.
    The disconnect is in the parameters. No race doesn't have a history of racism. Given the same military advantage over whites that whites had over other races, and it would have been the whites on the receiving end. That plays out in history before white domination, and afterward in areas where white influence came late. Racism came to be recognised as an evil during and after WWII, but mostly among European based societies - and it would be hard to argue that the influence of WWII wasn't almost solely responsible.

    This is another distinction. Indentured laborers fall along a spectrum. At one end are those who were fairly treated and it provided a mechanism by which they could achieve a goal (i.e., come to America, secure land, etc.). At the other are those who were unscrupulously locked in indefinite servitude by the terms of the indenture - making them no better than slaves. Between those two extremes lay a lot of variation. So I don't simply equate indentured servitude with slavery.
    And how much difference is there, I wonder, between abusive indentured servitude, and the bank that knowingly grants a mortgage to someone who cannot afford it, then waits for them to fail and repossesses their home, leaving them bankrupt and (potentially) homeless?
    Very little. And here we have an interesting phenomenon, in that malefactors frequently take advantage of the unthinkable to hide their activity. It was unthinkable that a priest could be a paederast - so paederastic priests managed to hide in plain sight - protected by the fact that such an accusation was wholly unbelievable. The same with financial sector perfidy - the idea that financial sector executives could or would behave less like bank managers than bank robbers was unthinkable. And so, they continued to get away with activity, un-investigated, that in any other sphere would have been investigated. Of course, all that changes when the facts are inescapable - then the idea becomes thinkable, and the people involved then get investigated.

    First - "past history" is redundant.
    Second, I'm not sure what your point is.
    past history, recent history, the rare current/on-going history, or future history.

    Racism is not limited to any one race. But, in my experience, most "black racism" (again, speaking about America) is not "blacks are superior to whites" so much as it is an angry response to the lot the black person in America has had to face for so many centuries.
    The declaration that whites are evil racist slave-owner-wannabees - the meme promoted by black activists - isn't just an angry response, it's thorough going racism. They're claiming moral superiority on the basis of their skin colour. It comes down to deciding whether racism, or only white people's racism is an evil. (and whether sexism, or only male sexism is evil, come to that) In either case (and others besides) I'll back the first options, without making excuses for anyone. "Playing the race card" as an excuse for accosting an innocent student while he waits for a bus (admittedly, the perpetrator wasn't black but it is the most recent example) - or declaring that the shooting of a black man was a white racist's hate crime when the killer (who wasn't being accused of murder) wasn't even white?

    While it has become significantly better in the modern day, the damages resulting from all those decades of broad-based racism and the ongoing reality of systemic racism still results in (on average) a significant gap between the white experience and the black experience. That doesn't make black racism right, but I don't see it as the same as white racism.
    People who focus on seeking retribution for such crimes generally do NOT go on to overcome their difficulties. Extending validity to groups who want retribution does no more than enable them to wallow in an unchanging situation. [there was a time when I had to chip a Christian for trumpeting the vilification he was receiving as evidence of their opposition to the truth. I pointed out that he was being vilified because he was behaving as an odious prat, not because anything he said was true ... and almost nothing of what he was saying was even a distant cousin of truth.] Same here, offensive people claim that reactions against their offensiveness is racist/sexist et al. when the boot is in reality on the other foot. It also happens that even fair minded people exposed to such treatment tend to look on other members of such groups with a certain suspicion. People (and even entire peoples) who work to improve their position and to overcome injustices past can improve their lot. I'll back any programme that sets out to overcome the difficulties and establish level playing fields. "Equal opportunity" and "affirmative action" are mutually exclusive processes, with the latter being inherently racist or sexist. Programmes that enhance a person's prospects of achieving their potential need to be adjusted depending on the impediments experienced by the individual, but that is a whole world different to making adjustments on the basis of class, gender, or creed.

    However, I also see no problem with people who act to improve things for their own identity group, provided that there is no attempt to tear others down in the process.
    Last edited by tabibito; 05-06-2019 at 03:15 AM.
    1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •