The South isn't racist

Luciana · February 27, 2016, 10:33:05 PM

Quote from: DAS B00T 2016 on February 27, 2016, 10:32:26 PM

God bless the Free Market.

We need Trump to make this free market great again

Solonoid · February 27, 2016, 10:35:11 PM

Quote from: Luciana on February 27, 2016, 10:32:00 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on February 27, 2016, 10:22:54 PM
Quote from: Solonoid on February 27, 2016, 10:19:06 PM
There were slaves of all races
[citation needed]
"slavery in America wasn't racist because history has had slavery of multiple races"

i think that is the message he's passing. or he's just looking at slavery in america at literally the base of the definition of slavery.

I mean even just slaves purchased in the slave trade between Europeans, Americans, and Africans.

A trade in which African merchants sold slaves to Europe and America.

Britain actually prefered white slaves and bought more of them from the White Market in Barbary than they bought black slaves from all other African Markets combined.

Luciana · February 27, 2016, 10:38:02 PM

Quote from: Solonoid on February 27, 2016, 10:35:11 PM

Quote from: Luciana on February 27, 2016, 10:32:00 PM
Quote from: Verbatim on February 27, 2016, 10:22:54 PM
Quote from: Solonoid on February 27, 2016, 10:19:06 PM
There were slaves of all races
[citation needed]
"slavery in America wasn't racist because history has had slavery of multiple races"

i think that is the message he's passing. or he's just looking at slavery in america at literally the base of the definition of slavery.
I mean even just slaves purchased in the slave trade between Europeans, Americans, and Africans.

A trade in which African merchants sold slaves to Europe and America.

Britain actually prefered white slaves and bought more of them from the White Market in Barbary than they bought black slaves from all other African Markets combined.

I get what you're saying about slavery as a whole, but I feel we're getting away from the base point of the thread, in that the south, and slavery, wasn't racist. When it was in fact about as racist as you can get. They viewed them as sub-human.

🍁 Aria 🔮 · February 27, 2016, 10:39:34 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on February 27, 2016, 10:18:57 PM

Quote from: Prime Multivac on February 27, 2016, 09:05:12 AM
Slavery itself wasn't racist
what

slavery itself isn't racist--sure, not in and of itself

but wasn't racist? as in, the american slave trade was not racist?

i'm pretty sure it was about as racist as you can get, actually

Feel like you're twisting the terminology there a little bit. The American slave trade didn't start because of some sense of racial superiority over africans, that false sense of superiority stemmed from the slave trade.

The issue is thinking that the American slave trade was vastly different from any other slave trade that occured. The only differences are that it lasted later than others and it continued after the importation of slaves was outlawed (which certainly didn't help to stem racism).

Slavery is slavery, it makes no difference whether you use "is" or "was". Was the south heavily racist? Oh hell yes. Was enslavement wrong? Hell yes. I don't know anyone who isn't living a century in the past who wouldn't agree with those views.

And just in case I just went on a huge tangent: what I'm saying is that trying to argue was/is is a silly kind of semantic argument. It's the same thing.

Assassin 11D7 · February 27, 2016, 10:39:59 PM

Probably viewed them as subhuman because whites were better at even being slaves than blacks.

Luciana · February 27, 2016, 10:41:00 PM

Quote from: Assassin 11D7 on February 27, 2016, 10:39:59 PM

Probably viewed them as subhuman because whites were better at even being slaves than blacks.

true

DAS B00T x2 · February 27, 2016, 10:42:04 PM

Quote from: Luciana on February 27, 2016, 10:33:05 PM

Quote from: DAS B00T 2016 on February 27, 2016, 10:32:26 PM
God bless the Free Market.
We need Trump to make this free market great again

Amen. brother

Solonoid · February 27, 2016, 10:42:47 PM

Quote from: Luciana on February 27, 2016, 10:38:02 PM

Quote from: Solonoid on February 27, 2016, 10:35:11 PM
Quote from: Luciana on February 27, 2016, 10:32:00 PM
Quote from: Verbatim on February 27, 2016, 10:22:54 PM
Quote from: Solonoid on February 27, 2016, 10:19:06 PM
There were slaves of all races
[citation needed]
"slavery in America wasn't racist because history has had slavery of multiple races"

i think that is the message he's passing. or he's just looking at slavery in america at literally the base of the definition of slavery.
I mean even just slaves purchased in the slave trade between Europeans, Americans, and Africans.

A trade in which African merchants sold slaves to Europe and America.

Britain actually prefered white slaves and bought more of them from the White Market in Barbary than they bought black slaves from all other African Markets combined.
I get what you're saying about slavery as a whole, but I feel we're getting away from the base point of the thread, in that the south, and slavery, wasn't racist. When it was in fact about as racist as you can get. They viewed them as sub-human.

Slavery in America was a part of a market of slave trade, people need to stop acting like our nation had its own thing going on.

We were part of a network that oppressed all races, working in conjunction to subjugate anyone we could.

Just because America bought the cheapest slaves, the black ones, doesn't mean that our market of subjugation was racist.

Verbatim · February 27, 2016, 10:45:50 PM

Quote from: Prime Multivac on February 27, 2016, 10:39:34 PM

The American slave trade didn't start because of some sense of racial superiority over africans

then why did it start, then

that's where i'm kinda lost

In order to enslave a group of people, you must believe that you are superior to them. If those Africans they enslaved were all white instead, do you really think they would've treated them the exact same way?

If so, then what was exactly the justification for the enslavement?

Luciana · February 27, 2016, 10:46:00 PM

Quote from: Prime Multivac on February 27, 2016, 10:39:34 PM

Feel like you're twisting the terminology there a little bit. The American slave trade didn't start because of some sense of racial superiority over africans, that false sense of superiority stemmed from the slave trade.

The issue is thinking that the American slave trade was vastly different from any other slave trade that occured. The only differences are that it lasted later than others and it continued after the importation of slaves was outlawed (which certainly didn't help to stem racism).

Slavery is slavery, it makes no difference whether you use "is" or "was". Was the south heavily racist? Oh hell yes. Was enslavement wrong? Hell yes. I don't know anyone who isn't living a century in the past who wouldn't agree with those views.

And just in case I just went on a huge tangent: what I'm saying is that trying to argue was/is is a silly kind of semantic argument. It's the same thing.

I feel like this is a better way of saying something I couldn't properly convey.

Luciana · February 27, 2016, 10:46:56 PM

Quote from: Solonoid on February 27, 2016, 10:42:47 PM

Just because America bought the cheapest slaves, the black ones, doesn't mean that our market of subjugation was racist.

But... it was. The other post conveyed it far better, so just refer to that.

Verbatim · February 27, 2016, 10:48:30 PM

typographical errors can suck my fucking cock

🍁 Aria 🔮 · February 27, 2016, 10:51:15 PM

The hard part is that it really is a hard distinction to draw in words. Slavery was not a racial issue in and of itself, but it without a doubt greatly assisted in fostering racism. The idea of slavery was not racially based; even after the ban on slave importation went into effect, slavery was simply based on if your father was in bondage, not necessarily because of your ethnicity. This resulted in cases of "white" African-American slaves (through unfortunate cases of slave-rape most of the time) that were still slaves regardless of their skin color.

Now, would we have had the Jim Crow era without slavery? Most likely not. Racism would not have thrived so much without the institution of slavery having been in place. So it's fair to say that slavery is a part of the American history of racism, but not racist in and of itself.

Solonoid · February 27, 2016, 10:55:16 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on February 27, 2016, 10:45:50 PM

Quote from: Prime Multivac on February 27, 2016, 10:39:34 PM
The American slave trade didn't start because of some sense of racial superiority over africans
then why did it start, then

that's where i'm kinda lost

In order to enslave a group of people, you must believe that you are superior to them. If those Africans they enslaved were all white instead, do you really think they would've treated them the exact same way?

If so, then what was exactly the justification for the enslavement?

Free Labour.

It was purely economic.

Blacks enslaved other blacks and sold them to whites in order to make money.

That is how slavery came to america.

Those black slavers also enslaved white Europeans, and North Africans, who were lighter skinned as well, who were popular in Europe.

America bought black slaves because they valued quantity over quality, and black ones were cheaper.

Verbatim · February 27, 2016, 11:01:00 PM

I guess I see now.

See, I was never taught any of this shit in any of my history classes.

DAS B00T x2 · February 27, 2016, 11:02:06 PM

Never trust a school to teach you history.

🍁 Aria 🔮 · February 27, 2016, 11:03:30 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on February 27, 2016, 10:45:50 PM

Quote from: Prime Multivac on February 27, 2016, 10:39:34 PM
The American slave trade didn't start because of some sense of racial superiority over africans
then why did it start, then

that's where i'm kinda lost

In order to enslave a group of people, you must believe that you are superior to them. If those Africans they enslaved were all white instead, do you really think they would've treated them the exact same way?

If so, then what was exactly the justification for the enslavement?

If you want to be literal, it started in the 1619 when some pirates stole a Spanish ship that was carrying slaves and unloaded them at the nearest port (Jamestown, VA).

America later joined the Triangular Trade, which vastly limited the "options" of slaves in the first place since Europe primarily stuck to the "trading" part instead of the "using" part.

I feel it be a bit condescending to explain ancient slavery to you, so I'll skip ahead and say that, as part of the Triangular Trade, ships loaded people who were already enslaved. I'm not about to "blah blah Africans did the thing too", but it is import as a reference that it didn't really matter what color you were. If you were a slave, you were below. The French were the only colonists who didn't treat the Native Americans like shit, thinking that they were barbaric and subhuman. Despite that, English colonists never attempted to enslave them (just steal their land). Spanish tried to enslave them without enslaving them, but the crown got pissed and told them to cut that shit out.

Tangent point: slaves weren't seen as subhuman because they were black, they were see as subhuman because they were slaves.

That of course starts to twist over the next couple of centuries due to the seed of racism planted with the sole use of one race as slaves and the growing of misconceptions.

Verbatim · February 27, 2016, 11:05:43 PM

I see.

Plasma Eagle · February 28, 2016, 11:56:37 AM

CUF will prevail.

PSU · February 28, 2016, 12:18:32 PM

The white guilt on this forum is embarrassing.

big sponge · February 28, 2016, 01:16:09 PM

Quote from: Solonoid on February 27, 2016, 10:15:47 PM

No one is saying that people should forget that the confederacy existed. Just that it's nothing to be proud of.

Also you're in denial if you still believe that slavery in the south wasn't a racist practice. The leaders of the confederacy and the states that seceded were all saying that the negros proper place in society was to be a slave to the white man. Not a general all encompassing slaves proper place in society, they specifically singled out black people and proclaimed that they were inferior to whites and therefore deserved to be subservient to them. The Jim Crow laws that came about after they were forced to free the slaves even further cement the fact that slavery in the American south was about race.

Thankfully no amount of southern revisionist history will ever be able to erase what the people of the day actually said. Even if the south tries its hardest to whitewash history.

Solonoid · February 28, 2016, 01:32:37 PM

Quote from: LC on February 28, 2016, 01:16:09 PM

Quote from: Solonoid on February 27, 2016, 10:15:47 PM

No one is saying that people should forget that the confederacy existed. Just that it's nothing to be proud of.

Also you're in denial if you still believe that slavery in the south wasn't a racist practice. The leaders of the confederacy and the states that seceded were all saying that the negros proper place in society was to be a slave to the white man. Not a general all encompassing slaves proper place in society, they specifically singled out black people and proclaimed that they were inferior to whites and therefore deserved to be subservient to them. The Jim Crow laws that came about after they were forced to free the slaves even further cement the fact that slavery in the American south was about race.

Thankfully no amount of southern revisionist history will ever be able to erase what the people of the day actually said. Even if the south tries its hardest to whitewash history.

The espositions of racists do not alter the reality of American Slavery.

big sponge · February 28, 2016, 01:58:02 PM

Quote from: Solonoid on February 28, 2016, 01:32:37 PM

Quote from: LC on February 28, 2016, 01:16:09 PM
Quote from: Solonoid on February 27, 2016, 10:15:47 PM

No one is saying that people should forget that the confederacy existed. Just that it's nothing to be proud of.

Also you're in denial if you still believe that slavery in the south wasn't a racist practice. The leaders of the confederacy and the states that seceded were all saying that the negros proper place in society was to be a slave to the white man. Not a general all encompassing slaves proper place in society, they specifically singled out black people and proclaimed that they were inferior to whites and therefore deserved to be subservient to them. The Jim Crow laws that came about after they were forced to free the slaves even further cement the fact that slavery in the American south was about race.

Thankfully no amount of southern revisionist history will ever be able to erase what the people of the day actually said. Even if the south tries its hardest to whitewash history.
The espositions of racists do not alter the reality of American Slavery.

The reality that slavery in the confederacy was racist.

Mordo · February 28, 2016, 02:11:03 PM

To use 'racist' as a means to slander historical tradition and remembrance as if it's at all comparable to slavery is pretty laughable to be honest.

I don't subscribe to this revisionist history hogwash, and yeah, the Civil War was quite obviously fought over slavery and myriad other racially charged issues, but this guardianista lefty snobbery whenever the South decides to organise a cultural even that isn't contingent with your views can be quite insufferable at times.

Word Wizard · February 28, 2016, 02:11:24 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Ellison

The Hån · February 28, 2016, 03:00:36 PM

Quote from: PSU on February 28, 2016, 12:18:32 PM

The white guilt on this forum is embarrassing.

it's not just embarrassing, it's disgusting.