gloswhite wrote:Hi KP, good to see you back
Good to see you mate.
It's a bit like Hotel California round here!
gloswhite wrote:Hi KP, good to see you back
You need to watch/listen to more television programmes.
gloswhite wrote:If references are removed from aspects of our past lives, be it statues, monuments, or writings, and then not referred to, are you not deleting history for the upcoming generations?
Last edited by T.R.O.Y. on Wed Jun 10 2020, 22:44; edited 1 time in total
T.R.O.Y. wrote:With respect Karly - that’s none of your business.
T.R.O.Y. wrote:gloswhite wrote:If references are removed from aspects of our past lives, be it statues, monuments, or writings, and then not referred to, are you not deleting history for the upcoming generations?
I think the key thing here is that nobody has suggested writings should be deleted - that would be abhorrent.
Remove celebrations of racists, put them in museums or replace them with information about the vast damage they did.
This country caused untold damage across the world through the empire, it’s finally time we recognise that.
finlaymcdanger wrote:Last week I read that Colston's company was responsible for the deaths of 20 thousand slaves during transportation to the Caribbean.
Your claim that 'no one knew any better' and 'it was the norm' back then is utter bullshit, Sluffy.
Philanthropy my ass. It's called fucking genocide!
okocha wrote:I don't believe that "no one knew better". The human conscience has always existed. We all instinctively know right from wrong.
What slave-traders did know was that they could take advantage and exploit the disadvantaged for huge personal profit. Perhaps their subsequent philanthropy was conscience-driven??
karlypants wrote:All will happen now is that the white people will start to kick off back against the blacks and then we will have massive unrest.
The trouble is that we are not a racist country and very tolerant in my opinion but people will fight back because of this and racism will now start again due to the rioting and damage to the statues.
An excellent piece Sluffy, especially the highlighting of the African's own involvement in the slave trade, something not a lot of people are probably aware of. I wasn't.Sluffy wrote:
No we don't.
All we know is that our bodies are hard wired over countless years of evolution to survive and whatever common values we are taught in the community we inhabit.
We are still basically animals under a thin veneer of civilisation that we developed in recent years. Look at the atrocities 'ethnic cleansing' in what was Yugoslavia in the mid 1990's (Bosnian War) and more recently just a few years ago by IS in Syria and Iraq. Seems that it might even still be going on in Myanmar with the Rohingya's. The veneer is still very thin at times.
Do you think those people, their communities and their country's didn't want it to happen - of course they did.
Slavery has been going on since the year dot and we still have it today 'modern slavery' as it is termed.
The Atlantic slave trade as we are talking about started in 1526 apparently and only started to become 'questionable' in the 1770's, over 250 years later.
I would say 250 uninterrupted years of doing something was considered the 'norm' rather than the exception, wouldn't you?
We all know it to have been wrong now - but it clearly was not an issue to most/all back in those years.
Colston lived from 1636 to 1721, so was born when slave trading had been going for 100 years and died 50 years before anyone started to think it wasn't right - so why would anyone think he was doing anything wrong at that time?
I'm not defending Colston or anyone else for that matter, merely saying they were a product of their time and should be judged as such in that context and not retrospectively.
George Washington was a slave owner, do people think he was a racist and should have his Mount Rushmore 'statue' blown up?
Andrew Jackson owned 200 slaves and his head is on twenty dollar notes, are people burning them - are you Fin?
Of course we all know better now but only because we've become more civilised and enlightened over the last few of hundred years or so.
Let's not forget though who enslaved all the African's in the first place for the likes of Colston to buy and transport them to the Americas because it wasn't us 'whites', it was in fact their fellow African 'brothers'.
Many nations such as the Ashanti of present-day Ghana and the Yoruba of present-day Nigeria were involved in slave-trading. Groups such as the Imbangala of Angola and the Nyamwezi of Tanzania would serve as intermediaries or roving bands, waging war on African states to capture people for export as slaves. Historians John Thornton and Linda Heywood of Boston University have estimated that of the Africans captured and then sold as slaves to the New World in the Atlantic slave trade, around 90% were enslaved by fellow Africans who sold them to European traders. Henry Louis Gates, the Harvard Chair of African and African American Studies, has stated that "without complex business partnerships between African elites and European traders and commercial agents, the slave trade to the New World would have been impossible, at least on the scale it occurred".
It simply was how it was at the time and should be judged in that context.
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum