Critical Race Theory

[Alive]

1 hour ago, teddyv said:

That's actually pretty irrelevant. The Europeans gladly involved themselves in the slave trade. If there is no market for the slaves, there's no slave trade.

It is certainly not irrelevant. Very sad, though.

What it does when looked at as history is take the focus away from color and onto behavior.

[Amigo42]

2 hours ago, AandW_Rootbeer said:

I see no issue telling the absolute truth about Slavery and the origins of the Black People in America.  I would even encourage it.   But if we're going to be undoubtedly honest, we have to first begin with "Who" sold these Slaves to the White Westerners.   It was their own Native Black Skinned African Descendants who made a fortune selling their own Black Skinned neighbors into Slavery.   But oddly enough, no one wants to mention that.

 

Records from the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database, directed by historian David Eltis at Emory University, show that the majority of captives brought to the U.S. came from Senegal, Gambia, Congo and eastern Nigeria. Europeans oversaw this brutal traffic in human cargo, but they had many local collaborators. “The organization of the slave trade was structured to have the Europeans stay along the coast lines, relying on African middlemen and merchants to bring the slaves to them,” said Toyin Falola, a Nigerian professor of African studies at the University of Texas at Austin. “The Europeans couldn’t have gone into the interior to get the slaves themselves.”

The anguished debate over slavery in the U.S. is often silent on the role that Africans played.

This is true but quite irrelevant.  By the time the slaves arrived on the Virginia shores, it was the slaveowners and not Africans who were involved in treatment of the slaves.

[one.opinion]

24 minutes ago, Alive said:

It is certainly not irrelevant. Very sad, though.

It is certainly sad, and perhaps not completely irrelevant, but the American colonists were going to get slaves from somewhere. Selling people into slavery was clearly abhorrent. However, the system of chattel slavery that dominated a long period of time in North America was even worse - and the comparison isn't even close.

The role the church played in chattel slavery is also very sad. If people want to include all aspects of the history of slavery, the church should not be overlooked. While certainly not alone, the SBC was at the forefront of this shameful history (https://sbts-wordpress-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/sbts/uploads/2018/12/Racism-and-the-Legacy-of-Slavery-Report-v3.pdf).

It should also be noted that the remnants of slavery and Jim Crow continue to disadvantage people of African descent in this country to this day.

[AandW_Rootbeer]

5 hours ago, teddyv said:

That's actually pretty irrelevant. The Europeans gladly involved themselves in the slave trade. If there is no market for the slaves, there's no slave trade.

Not sure why it would be irrelevant when Toyin Falola, a Nigerian professor of African studies even explained,  “The Europeans couldn’t have gone into the interior to get the slaves themselves.”

 

If the Europeans weren't able to fetch the Slaves themselves and no one like the African Natives fetched the slaves for them, there would have been no slave trade.

 

Don't tell me you're in denial that African Natives sold out their own people?

Surely you gist!

Edited June 29, 2021 by AandW_Rootbeer

[SIC]

13 hours ago, Amigo42 said:

 Look at India today.  The entire caste system of view lighter-skinned Indians as being higher in society and darker-skinned as being lesser is a racist system with roots probably left over by the British colonial system.

As an Indian myself I would like to point out that the caste system has been around for two millenia. And throughout the two millenia it has always been based on the color of the skin. 'Caste' is the English name given to the system in the 17th century. The original Sanskrit name is 'varna' which literally means color.

The modern day caste system is not a result of British colonial system. In fact the British abolished some the worst forms of casteism.. Practices like untouchability were actively opposed by the British.

[AandW_Rootbeer]

15 hours ago, Amigo42 said:

This is true but quite irrelevant.  By the time the slaves arrived on the Virginia shores, it was the slaveowners and not Africans who were involved in treatment of the slaves.

According to SNOPES, a Democratic based Fact Checker site claims that a total of the population of the USA today, only ...

https://www.snopes.com › news › 2019/08/07 › percent...

 “only 1.4% of Americans owned slaves.” 

 

That means of the 380 million current occupants of the USA, only a 750,000 descendants come from slave owners.   Meaning the rest of us (379,000,000) citizens had nothing to do with slavery nor did any of our ancestors.

 

So, if I am not accepting of the whining and cries of those who try to blame me randomly over being lighter skinned (Italian and Native American), and they are trying to tell me I owe them something, don't be shocked when I attack back.   My family has no connections, never had any connections, and don't believe we are responsible for what has happened and continues to happen.   It's not our fault nor is it our duty to fix something we have no part or control over.   We are trying to survive like everyone else.   But we're being blamed because of skin color like we were the slave owner themselves.   We're tired of being blamed.  We're tired of being falsely accused.  And we feel like our backs are against the wall with only one option left.   Which is to fight back!

[teddyv]

13 hours ago, AandW_Rootbeer said:

Not sure why it would be irrelevant when Toyin Falola, a Nigerian professor of African studies even explained,  “The Europeans couldn’t have gone into the interior to get the slaves themselves.”

 

If the Europeans weren't able to fetch the Slaves themselves and no one like the African Natives fetched the slaves for them, there would have been no slave trade.

 

Don't tell me you're in denial that African Natives sold out their own people?

No, I am very aware that local African tribes were involved in the slave trade. I worked in Ghana, one of the main slave trading areas for many years so I'm aware of the history. Even one of the original Portuguese forts still stands on the coast where many slaves were handed off.

I'd have to check how it played out. Did the Europeans arrive looking specifically for slaves? Or did the locals offer slaves for trade and the Europeans agreed? There is plenty of moral culpability to go around.

13 hours ago, AandW_Rootbeer said:

Surely you gist!

I am not gisting, although sometimes I jest. :)

[teddyv]

1 hour ago, AandW_Rootbeer said:

According to SNOPES, a Democratic based Fact Checker site claims that a total of the population of the USA today, only ...

https://www.snopes.com › news › 2019/08/07 › percent...

 “only 1.4% of Americans owned slaves.” 

 

That means of the 380 million current occupants of the USA, only a 750,000 descendants come from slave owners.   Meaning the rest of us (379,000,000) citizens had nothing to do with slavery nor did any of our ancestors.

 

So, if I am not accepting of the whining and cries of those who try to blame me randomly over being lighter skinned (Italian and Native American), and they are trying to tell me I owe them something, don't be shocked when I attack back.   My family has no connections, never had any connections, and don't believe we are responsible for what has happened and continues to happen.   It's not our fault nor is it our duty to fix something we have no part or control over.   We are trying to survive like everyone else.   But we're being blamed because of skin color like we were the slave owner themselves.   We're tired of being blamed.  We're tired of being falsely accused.  And we feel like our backs are against the wall with only one option left.   Which is to fight back!

Just because very few of European descent could not afford to own slaves, I suspect that many, outside the abolitionists, had very little moral qualms around slavery. 

[AandW_Rootbeer]

2 hours ago, teddyv said:

Just because very few of European descent could not afford to own slaves, I suspect that many, outside the abolitionists, had very little moral qualms around slavery. 

I am not suggesting the first Europeans to own slaves and those who could not afford them are not as equally guilty.   I am suggesting that because today's Black community are only just seeing skin color and connecting that to slavery is going to lead to a bigger problem for them.  For one, the majority of white people in America have no connections to slavery of any kind at all.  Secondly, we don't take lightly to be lumped into a group that does have those connections.  And thirdly, we don't feel bad nor have any remorse once we've become wrongfully blamed and accused of connections to slavery over being a lighter shade of skin color.   

 

In fact, the majority of us have felt bad for the Black community and have tried to help because we are not racist.   But this newer generation of Black peoples are grouping us together in a one size fits all bill.  And that has made us take a step back and understand this newer Black generation is a problem for us.   A problem we are slowly beginning to feel that needs to be corrected.   And once we turn on them, the Government won't be able to stop it.   Black people had real allies and now they're losing the support they once had.   And when the history books have all been written, it will reveal the Black community became their own worst enemy.

Edited June 29, 2021 by AandW_Rootbeer

[teddyv]

6 hours ago, AandW_Rootbeer said:

I am not suggesting the first Europeans to own slaves and those who could not afford them are not as equally guilty.   I am suggesting that because today's Black community are only just seeing skin color and connecting that to slavery is going to lead to a bigger problem for them.  For one, the majority of white people in America have no connections to slavery of any kind at all.  Secondly, we don't take lightly to be lumped into a group that does have those connections.  And thirdly, we don't feel bad nor have any remorse once we've become wrongfully blamed and accused of connections to slavery over being a lighter shade of skin color.   

Well, for the American descendants of African slaves, its going to come down to those who owned them. There were multi-generational slave families so their original captors mean very little for the first, second or third generation of those original slaves. All they see is their owner.

I recognize that you likely have little to no direct connection with slave ownership. I get that you don't want to be lumped in with them.

I have had a similar response to the criticism of the 'white' people with the treatment of the indigenous people of Canada. Being a child of Dutch immigrants of the 1950's I have no connection to the things that happened over the previous 100 years. However, as I thought about it, much of the abuse was perpetrated by the church. As one who identifies as Christian and a member of the Church then I do carry some of that responsibility toward reconciliation and repentance.

 

Edited to add:

Here's a fairly interesting blog post by Dr. Todd Wood, who is a noted young earth creationist. It's talking about comments regarding a Youtube video he did on racism but touches on common points brought up by many.

Edited June 30, 2021 by teddyv
added link