World uneasily watches US protests

Appeasers believe that if you keep throwing steaks to a tiger, the tiger will become a vegetarian.

 

You proved nothing. You never have.

You just make statements and THINK you proved them.

How would you know? All you are good for are bland statements without the slightest argumentative substantiation ...

 

True and true, no question, but racially based slavery has only existed in any extensive form for about 300 years.

 

Not without a link. So you know... you haven't proved your point.

 

I'm nor sure that changes anything. Slavery has always been based on power, slaves generally don't got any.

 

I proved in post 94. You're just acting like an ostrich. Stick that head deep in the sand and pretend it all did not happen.

 

They succeeded in removing it from the required course list. Before everyone who went to Stamford had to take the course.

 

So you concur that the Ancients were racist, protoracist meaning the first or earliest type of racist. You will not claim the Ancients weren't racists, I assume, being the diligent stickler for accuracy.

Again the experts disagree with you, this time about racism being inborn.

https://time.com/67092/baby-racists-survival-strategy/

 

The gender binary, the heterosexual nature of marriage, to name two. But these aren't principals, they are prejudices which will decrease social dysfunction. You can hold these prejudices no matter what your occupation and density of your neighborhood.

 

That depends on your form of slavery. In the Ottomans slaves were the bureaucracy, the Grand Vizier was a slave and the Janissaries were boy-slaves taken from Balkan Christian families who vied for the privilege since it usually made them rich. The Janissaries in fact came to control the Sultanate. There were also the Mamelukes, soldier-slaves in Egypt who did the same thing. One would think you would not be wise to arm slaves and make them your soldiers, but it was not an uncommon practice.

To my knowledge only the Nazis and the Antebellum South operated on the principle that some races were all born slaves and that slaves were only useful for the lowest type of labor. The AnteBellum South had extensive numbers of black freemen, some of whom owned slaves themselves and the plantations quite often had slaves doing skilled labor particularly on the larger plantations which were like small towns; but the general idea was still that blacks were not fully human and this justified their slavery. Slavery based on the idea that the slave isn't human isn't really all that common it seems

 

Those old timey slaves had it great huh?

 

I think that believing things which decrease your social dysfunction are always desirable is a fundamental error many of us make. Society is, after all, made up of individuals and it is therefore the individual that should come first. If you can make individuals happy while decreasing social dysfunction so much the better but making the happiness of society always superior to the happiness of individuals is how we get whole nations full of unhappy neurotics, like we have in the US now.

 

So you did make it up and have no links at all.

 

Some did, in the Ottoman Empire, and others did in Rome and Greece and even Viking Norway. Some were literally worked to death because they were so cheap it cost less to buy another after a few days than to feed them, as happened to Sardinians used for salt mining in Rome, blacks sent to the Indigo and sugar plantations in the West Indies and some Chinese in 19thc America among many others

 

The Ancients recognized the races but didn't pay lots of attention to them, certainly not as much as we did until relatively recently

I don't think we are discussing the same sort of racism as they were discussing in the article.

 

CNN.

Me so happy.

 

Before we created racism to justify African slavery, slavery was a matter of conquest and was not tied to race at all. The term comes from Slav. Rome went there and took slaves all the time hence the modern word slave. But as soon as man realized they could capture and enslave others, they did it all over the world. The institution of slavery was an act of power for thousands of years. Almost every culture that ever existed had slaves. Rome had slaves, Greece had slaves, China had slaves, Native Americans had slaves, Aztecs had slaves, Persians had slaves, everyone in power had slaves. But we loved our slaves and we kept it alive in the modern era. That is the difference. In the wake of Locke, Hume, Smith, Descartes and so many others we alone in the modern era embraced slavery and legitimized it. How? By telling ourselves that black people were not human beings. And apparently we still don't consider them human beings which is why the nation is aflame as we speak.

 

You're right! Racial slavery had to do with the climate in the American south and Caribbean. Europeans couldn't work in the heat. The slave markets in Istanbul were packed with slaves from Russia, the Balkans, or the ones captured by the Barbary pirates when they ravaged the towns along the Mediterranean. Hayreddin Babarossa who was made an admiral by the Ottomans, would actually chew people when he was fighting, and was looked on as the devil incarnate. Later on the Ottomans built a shrine for him outside of Istanbul - believe it or not.

 

No, of course not. I taught them to be historians, not what to think. More like challenging them to figure out how to think.

I happen to believe the Civil War was about many things, including slavery.

My students got an introduction to the carnage without any discussion of other issues. They almost always concluded it was awful. Then I told them the question that students have over the years almost always asked: "Why were they fighting?" That's where their research begins if that's the question they want to answer. I taught them how to look and to keep in mind they're looking to explain. They were free to examine other issues.

I salted the discussion with information about the soldiers, their commanders, their letters home, and their origins.

I asked them to come up with other questions, not saying what my questions are.

What do you think from what I told you about the way I taught about the Civil War? My students knew a lot about the Civil War when they were finished, but there was no teaching of facts, and certainly no teaching them what to think about facts.

Me? I like Grant's recollection of Lee's surrender at Appomattox:

"What General Lee's feelings were I do not know. As he was a man of much dignity, with an impassible face, it was impossible to say whether he felt inwardly glad that the end had finally come, or felt sad over the result, and was too manly to show it. Whatever his feelings, they were entirely concealed from my observation; but my own feelings, which had been quite jubilant on the receipt of his letter, were sad and depressed. I felt like anything rather than rejoicing at the downfall of a foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much for a cause, though that cause was, I believe, one of the worst for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse. I do not question, however, the sincerity of the great mass of those who were opposed to us ..."​

There is no credible evidence of that.

Not much of an argument.

I don't recall.

Sure... better to teach them what to think instead of how to think for themselves.

 

Yeah, keep believing the MSM! That's why some Russian tax invaders in Britain became so frightened when the Skripals were poisoned, that they started negotiating with Moscow to return back home. Putin said he could care less if they returned, but he wants the money they stole returned.

The man that was going out with Julia Skripal was a member of Russian Intelligence, and when the Skripals were poisoned by the MI6, he realized they knew who he was and disappeared. British Intelligence feared that Julia was being used as an in-between to gather intelligence from her father, so they decided to get rid of them. As for the poison, it's made in a laboratory about a mile away from where the Skripals were sitting.

Are the Skripals alive or were they killed by the MI6, that is the question? If Julia is still alive, don't you think the least the British government should do is to let her grandmother know?

 

If the Christian colonists were to have edified the slaves and rid them of the pagan beliefs such as voodoo and witchcraft, it would mean that they recognized them as being fully human and would have to free them. At the time, the blacks believed that it was the institution of slavery that was causing all the cruelty, but I think it was because they were able to continue their pagan practices and it had poisoned the atmosphere.

If it wasn't so, then why did a highly educated former slave in Britain say that he couldn't understand why the English people, who were the kindest people in the world, could be so cruel in the Caribbean?

 

Are you kidding? Whoever runs CNN must get down on their knees and thank the Divine Deity for Dirty Donnie Daily. Every time he throws another tweet even close to them their ratings go up another 100 points and don't go down for a week.

No publicity is bad publicity.

Was it the Romans who first took slaves from the Slavs? I was always told it was the Vikings, specifically the Swedes who went East instead of West and then down the Russian rivers. The Romans took slaves from the Gauls, British, Greeks, most of the Mediterranean nations but Scythia was Terra Incognita to them. ( I think, then again Caesar and Tacitus even knew of the Finns according to one quote I heard.)

Details. The rest of your analysis is spot on. We are the first of the Great Civilizations to eschew slavery and we have done that only legally. There are more people held in some form of either defacto or (rarely but still there) actual legal bondage in the world today than at any other time in this planet's sad history.

 

Are you kidding? Whoever runs CNN must get down on their knees and thank the Divine Deity for Dirty Donnie Daily. Every time he throws another tweet even close to them their ratings go up another 100 points and don't go down for a week.

No publicity is bad publicity.

 

He was probably being facetious. The East Asians can be studiedly cruel and the blacks can be savage but for pure unadulterated atrocity nobody but nobody even holds a candle to the whites

 

Spoiler:
They do arrest looters and arsonists.
But in America we don't kill people for stealing a pair of Nikes, That's what started this.
Oh. Todays rubber bullets.