It Was The Times!

It was the times!
| Abagond
http://abagond.wordpress.com/2010/02/20/it-was-the-times/
Abagond
500 words a day on whatever I want
Feeds: Posts Comments
It was the times!

Sat 20 Feb 2010 by abagond (http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/02/12/lincoln/)It was the times is an argument that says people in the past were not as evil and terrible as they seem to us because they lived in a different time when moral ideas were less advanced. We are judging them by the ideas of our own time, not theirs, which is unfair. For example, most American high school history books downplay the racism of famous white people, so when people find out, say, that Abraham Lincoln said this: I will say then that I am not, nor even have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. At first they are shocked but then many will say, Well, he was a man of his times so it is not as bad as it seems. Everyone thought like that back then. It was the times! The same argument is used to excuse owning black slaves: the practice of keeping slaves goes back thousands of years, but our ideas about how terrible it is do not. And so on. To a degree it makes sense. For example, the ancient Greeks left baby girls in the woods to be eaten
1 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
It was the times! | Abagond
by wolves. That might seem shocking, but at the time they had neither safe abortion nor the Christian ideas by which to judge it as wrong and condemn it. But the argument can be taken too far. It can be used to excuse great evils, to avoid facing up to an ugly past. A good example is Jim Crow, the laws and customs in the American South that kept the races apart and blacks down from 1877 to 1967, featuring such practices as lynching and Klan terror. As seen from 1810 it was revolutionary the slaves were freed! As seen from 2010 it was cruel and immoral and profoundly racist. But seen from 1910 it was just the way things were it was the times! It was the times excuses the way things were no matter how evil. It allows historians in 2900, for example, to look back at the millions killed in the 1900s by Stalin, Hitler and Mao and say it was the times! When evil becomes commonplace it is still evil. Just because everyone does it does not make it right. Nor do moral ideas advance as much as people seem to think. Nearly 2,000 years ago Jesus Christ said to do unto others as you would have others do unto you the Golden Rule. A simple idea known throughout the West down through the ages and one that is enough to condemn racism, slavery, Hitler and all the rest. See also: American history books and racism (../2010/02/17/american-history-books-and-racism/) Lincoln (http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/02/12/lincoln/) whites-only proms (../2009/05/26/whites-only-proms/) How to argue like a white racist (../2009/10/05/how-to-argue-like-a-white-racist/) The Arab trader Argument (../2009/10/03/the-arab-trader-argument/) an argument based on the same broken moral thinking racism is natural (../2009/09/28/racism-is-unnatural/) Get over it (../2009/11/26/get-over-it/) How to deny a genocide (../2009/10/06/how-to-deny-a-genocide/) Jim Crow (../2008/03/20/jim-crow/) Posted in arguments, history | 102 Comments
102 Responses
tulio on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 20:37:13 Good topic and thats something I have thought about many times. The problem with using do unto others quote or anything from the Bible is that the same book has been used to justify cruelty as well. People would read the Bible and say blacks are the sons of Ham and cursed and were made to be slaves. The Bible even supports slavery in some parts, and white slavers were quick to avail themselves of these passages. For example: Leviticus 25:44 Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy
2 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
slaves. 1 Peter 2:18 Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. Col 3:22 Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything; and do it, not only when their eye is on you and to win their favor, but with sincerity of heart and reverence for the Lord. So we see the problem of using the Bible as a source of ethics with regards to social matters. I think Lincoln was a progressive relative to the era he was born in. Any white man that said he believed blacks and whites were equal at that time wouldve been regarded as a lunatic and certainly wouldnt have been taken seriously enough to become president. Had Lincoln been born in our time, he would not have held the same views. The word racism wasnt even in the lexicon during the 19th century, not to mention any understanding of racism in any sociological sense. That didnt happen until well into the 20th century. I think the it was the time argument is just another form of cultural relativism where we judge other cultural practices by their terms and not ours. In this case, we our judging our own culture, but recognizing that our culture had changed over time. Its all cultural relativism when it comes down to it.
lucia on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 21:24:48 i think it kind of comes down to the issue of whether one regards morals as absolute(unchanging, true in every culture and every time). Personally I reject this notion. I belive morals are relative to ones society, culture and era. For exampleCannibalism is in the modern western world unacceptable and we view it as disgusting. However for certain tribes in the not so distant past, cannibalism was acceptable. Does it mean that those tribesmen were wrong to do what they did? why do we think we have the right to judge another culture and eras moral values by our own? Its ethnocentrism, something which many of us are guilty of at the lowest levels. Believing ones own culture/era to be superior. (sorry for the cliche cannibalism example) Its a highly emotional charged issue, Becuase of course I would never want to excuse something like the slave trade. Its in my blood and Its upsetting, I remember learning about the truth of the slave trade for the first time when i was a kid and crying. It made me feel sad to imagine some of my ancestors being treated like that. However I do generally take issue with judging other eras and cultures against our own modern western values. When evil becomes commonplace it is still evil. Just because everyone does it does not make it right. from a purely philosophical view I have to disagree.
3 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
as much as i may wish otherwise I do not belive morals and absolute, they are relative.
lucia on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 21:27:41 but then just to say obviously absolutism vs relativism is an age old argument. Im not saying anyone who is absolutist is wrong, but from point of view I cannot accept the notion, I find it logically absurd.
no_slappz abagond,
on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 21:35:41
I believe the Golden Rule is a lot older than Jesus and the Bible a book of fiction, by the way. The Golden Rule is one of those ideas with murky origins, but clearly Jesus was not first with the phrase. However, he seems to have gotten the credit. Does it matter? That aside, you seem caught up in the idea that you can judge the past by todays standards. Slavery as an unacceptable cruelty is a recent development, and much of the muslim world still treats women as chattel. Evil is relative. Consider the Spanish Inquisition. And the other Inquisitions that occurred around Europe in that era. Then there is the fact that you willfully ignore the savagery practiced all through Africa in the past and the present. If Hutus can slaughter 800,000 Tutsis in 1994, and brutal civil wars can rage for decades in African nations, escaping evil on that continent is still nearly impossible. Not to mention the fact that every year drinking dirty water in Africa kills FIVE MILLION people.
B. R. on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 21:36:33 I think the real trick is , if people accepted jim crow and segragated states and baseball as near back as the fifties, we have to ask ourselves , what is the equivalent of that going on today? What will people look back on in 50 years about racism and discrimination and think , my god how could people think that way? For sure there is much to look at now and know it is still horrible for racism
lucia on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 21:40:23 for once (astoundingly) i am actually agreeing with you no_slappz.. until this Then there is the fact that you willfully ignore the savagery practiced all through Africa in the past and the present. If Hutus can slaughter 800,000 Tutsis in 1994, and brutal civil wars can rage for decades in African nations, escaping evil on that continent is still nearly impossible.
4 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
Not to mention the fact that every year drinking dirty water in Africa kills FIVE MILLION people. how is that revelant?
lucia on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 21:46:43 @ B.R.What will people look back on in 50 years about racism and discrimination and think , my god how could people think that way? i believe wider society will look back at discrimantion against homosexuals with great disgust and shame. possible even further in the future the eating of animal products. whos not to say in hundred years time our descendents will look back on the way we treat homosexuals and not be utterly replused the same way we feel when we look back at the treatment of blacks. yet discrimination and judging of homosexuals is commonplace- Ive seen bad comments about gays on this blog(not from the author from commentors), it is illegal in many countries and they are often barred from certain rights. sound familiar? this is just my opinion and i am aware that some of it may contradict with what I just said about moral relativism but im tired so whatever.
Thad on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 22:01:15 Theres a difference between UNDERSTANDING what went on and justifying it morally and ethically. I also think that one needs to walk a fine line on these moral and ethical presumptions. You start saying Oh, I know whats good and bad for everyone, everywhere because my morals are flawless and absolute, and youre walking the same path as all of those nice gentlemen who went down to Africa, Bibles in hand, to save the savages for Jeezis.
Thad on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 22:14:40 and by the way, it wasnt The Times. It was the f@#$ing New York Post!
J Lincoln said:
on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 23:20:19
I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.
5 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
J And again:
on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 23:22:19
We didnt go into war to put down slavery but to put the flag back Sept 13, 1862
angel on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 00:16:52 The Whites twisted the Bible to justify slavery. When God condemned a people, he exterminated them. Canaan was cursed, his descendants became slaves to the Israelites and were exterminated. CUSH was the progenitor of the Black race. We have become numerous and tend religious. God promised Jews he would make them a large nation but because they turned their back on Him, they are less than two percent of the worlds population. It was foretold they would be hunted down which has come true and that they would have no country or no home to call their own which is also true. Israel today is a mess as they moved in on the Paestinians who of course retaliated as they were there and uprooted to make way for the foreigner jews
eshowoman on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 00:18:30 think that the whitewashing of men like Jefferson, Washington and Lincoln is another way for many whites to disavow racism and support the continuation of white privilege and supremacy. These presidents swore to uphold the Constitution, but all believed that people of color were not human enough to be counted as American citizens. Many whites need strategies like this to deal with the cognitive dissonance that was built into the foundation of this country. People of color are a constant reminder that this country does not provide liberty and justice for all.Looking back to the Great White Men of the past and deemphasizing their deeply racist ideology, makes it easier to live with the benefits whites have accrued over the centuries.
temple on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 00:18:57 Bush & Cheney will probably be referred to as men of their time some years from now, when discussions of the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan & torture of prisoners is discussed.
angel on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 00:26:25 God even said if the Jews turned on him, he would let the enemy surround their city and seige them. They would become so desperate that they would eat their children. Thats what happened when the Romans under Cestius Gallus came. So the Bible does not promote the idea that Blacks were cursed. And the penalty for kidnapping was death. Slavery under Israelites was done to pay off a debt.
J I have to agree with you spot on no tautology this time he he No seriously
on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 00:27:17
Even during the Iraq investigation in the UK, which was only a few weeks ago . Tony Blair suggested he did what he thought was right AT THE TIME
6 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
temple on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 00:28:59 I think the definition of man of his time often depends on your world view (Js phrase). Pat Robertson referred to Toussaint & the Haitians who revolted against France for their freedom as having a pact with the devil. But it could be said that Toussaint was a man of his time.
Jalylah Abraham Lincoln was black.
on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:03:58
tulio on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:09:49 think that the whitewashing of men like Jefferson, Washington and Lincoln is another way for many whites to disavow racism and support the continuation of white privilege and supremacy. Naturally, black people will look at the founders and see slaveowners and white supermacists. How could you not look at them and see that if you are looking at American history from the underdogs point of view. At the same time, its important to ask whether slavery and white supremacy *defined* their legacy. Do we remember them for being luminaries that devised a government of checks and balances that has withstood nearly half a millennium or are they to be viewed primarily as slave owners? What was more important in their legacy? I guess it depends on who you ask. Its like asking is Martin Luther Kings legacy defined by his civil rights accomplishments or the fact that he was a well known womanizer? Do we view Socrates as the great philosopher, or as a man who molested young boys as was acceptable for ancient Greek men of stature? The thing is, most historical figures were checkered characters. In that sense, doubt the founding fathers werent any exception. Whats done is done, and Im not sure comparing the values of people hundreds or thousands of years ago to current standards makes any sense.
Jalylah on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:13:59 So what if Jefferson, Washington and Lincoln were racist? They were still great men. Why is being a racist bad and why is white privilege bad? Why would a white person want to give that up?
alwaysright101 on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:15:16 usually when people say it was the times only do so so they can ease their conscience on the fact that they admire and idolize a racist person this is why i hate how people hold all these figures so inhumanly. i believe one should focus as much on the bad side of someone as the good. its like with charles lindbergh, most would be unable to tell you that he was a racist and adulterer, and when they find out, it breaks their idealistic image of him. when you are black you cant afford to look at them unrealistically, you have to look at them for what they were, people who did something good but were not good people themselves.
7 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
now if only people would use their brains and realize the pointlessness in idolizing people to the point that they excuse their wrongs.
J on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:17:45 I think if you use an African centred approach you will get a different conclusion more or less every time to the type of questions posed in this post.
alwaysright101 on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:20:50 i actually have this belief that what was liberal 40 years ago is considered conservative today, so anyone who is liberal today, will be considered conservative in the following generations. i think its always been liberals who got things done. whether one admits it or not, the founding fathers were liberal. not liberal in todays since, but a liberal is someone who is progressive and wants to move society forward, and that is what they did by rebelling against england. liberal is always whats changing, its never just the status quo. conservatism changes when its forced to by accepting what they were once against but not what is currently against (not always as racism is still rampant in the republican party). so i am curious about what liberals 40 years from now will be for. every generation has been part of some major social civil rights issue, 150 years ago it was slavery, 90 years ago it was women and voting, 40 years ago it was black civil rights, and currently it is homosexuality. so whats next?
MerriMay on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:27:43 Eshowoman: think that the whitewashing of men like Jefferson, Washington and Lincoln is another way for many whites to disavow racism and support the continuation of white privilege and supremacy. These presidents swore to uphold the Constitution, but all believed that people of color were not human enough to be counted as American citizens. Many whites need strategies like this to deal with the cognitive dissonance that was built into the foundation of this country. People of color are a constant reminder that this country does not provide liberty and justice for all.Looking back to the Great White Men of the past and deemphasizing their deeply racist ideology, makes it easier to live with the benefits whites have accrued over the centuries. Very well said eshowoman. I completely agree:)
Eurasian Sensation @ alwaysright101: spot on.
on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:33:03
The scary thing is the way that so many people look to the founding fathers as somehow so extraordinarily wise and brilliant that everything they decided upon must be simply accepted. Glenn Beck is an obvious example. We need to remember than while many of those people were great men in many aspects, they were horribly flawed as well. We should admire them for their good works, sure, but not deify them as many do.
8 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
Thad on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:33:51 i actually have this belief that what was liberal 40 years ago is considered conservative today, so anyone who is liberal today, will be considered conservative in the following generations. Liberal beliefs in 1970: 1) Pot should be legalized. 2) Foreign wars are bad. 3) Affirmative Action is a good thing. 4) Free love is a must. 5) We should not be overly proud of the United States. Sorry, I dont see today as being more liberal than 40 years ago.
alwaysright101 on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:36:12 i personally despise the founding fathers for the sheer fact that they were slave holdersi am one of those people who doesnt care for the 4th of July. i was just saying that when conservatives like to obsess about the founding fathers while complaining about liberals, the founding fathers were in their own time considered liberals of that time period.
alwaysright101 @thad
on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:37:00
I was referring to the 1960s liberalism before the vietnam war and hippies.
Thad on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:42:44 i personally despise the founding fathers for the sheer fact that they were slave holders Including John Adams and Benjamin Franklin, eh? Renowned planters of their day and age [roll eyes]
Thad on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:45:12 i personally despise the founding fathers for the sheer fact that they were slave holders Then youre really referring to the 1950s. 60 years ago, not 40. So are you talking about these things, then? 1) A cold war with Russia 2) Land wars in Asia 3) Pork barrel politics Hey, maybe there is something to this after all!
B. R.
9 of 45
on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 02:34:45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
Lucia, I think you make a great point about the atitudes about gay people. Since the blog is about racial issues , I stuck to that, but certainly what you say is true and what the person said about Bush and Chenny. We actualy only have begun to realise the place they hold in history for really bringing the USA down for our children and their children. The damage is immence and will take many years and maybe imposible to recover. escho, you know, hearing these words of Lincoln and Jefersons adventures , and the other founding fathers double standards with black people, they maybe be the exact roots of how basic white people deal and think about black people today.Along with their great contributions , they may always have considered them selves a very sepreate entity from black people , never could envision true equality and acceptance . This plays out today in so many white peoples relationships to black people that there is a connection. Its like seeing the Cival War documentary, it struck me, all those old pictures, of that time , the war and you would see white people and black people in those pictures. That is who we are today. We arnt so far off from the dynamic of who those people were except for a lot of changes of political racial dynamics and laws. But , underneath , we are the same (Im talking general , not individuals here. There have always been visionaries and differant thinking people on the fringe )
Thad on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 02:43:23 We actualy only have begun to realise the place they hold in history for really bringing the USA down for our children and their children. The damage is immence and will take many years and maybe imposible to recover. We can only hope.
Angel on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 08:17:34 It wad the times is an excuse. The reason being was there were anti_slavery opponents that were very vocal back in the day. Animal rights got started as they were appalled by the slaves treatment. So there are people worth honouring and putting in our history books because they were the pioneers of the day. In England as well, while Blacks were slaves, when free, they were allowed to study, to work and attend public functions without being lynched or recaptured and sold into slavery. Even Africans were allowed to come ans study at University in England. So when it comes to American treatmnt of slaves, it wasnt the TIMES, it was the GREED!!!
jeri No slappz
on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 19:47:08
You mentioned that Africa has civil wars and that the Hutus slaughtered the Tutsis. What does this have to do with white people justifying slavery? Evil is evil, whether white people do it or black people do it. The fact that there has been civil wars in Africa doesnt justify the behavior of evil white people. Why is it whenever black people talk about the evils that white people have done in this country, you want to go to a completely different topic. No one said that black people couldnt commit an evil act. What Abagond was saying that to say that was the times doesnt justify past evil acts. That has NOTHING to do with what you are talking about.
10 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
jeri on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 19:51:29 And it is importand to talk about the past so we wont repeat past atrocities. If you justify past acts, instead of learning from them, you are destined to repeat them.
Jalylah on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 20:47:26 Eurasian Sensation, you are just as racist as anybody. Whats up with this comment? Of course I dont think whites are perfect. White people have done really well at f***ing up the world. What do you mean by this racist comment.
Eurasian Sensation @ Jalylah:
on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 23:17:11
Eurasian Sensation, you are just as racist as anybody. Whats up with this comment? Of course I dont think whites are perfect. White people have done really well at f***ing up the world. What do you mean by this racist comment. Want to know what I mean? Lets look at history. You could start by counting the number of indigenous people who died in the Americas and Australia during the time of European colonialisation. You could then count the number of African and Asian countries ruthlessly exploited by European powers. You could think about the Chinese Opium War, in which the British went to war with China for the right to sell heroin to the Chinese, who were trying to rid their country of the drug. Then you could consider with the USAs history of fomenting civil wars all over the world and overthrowing democratically elected governments because they were too far left for the USAs liking. Thats what I mean when I say white people have done plenty of things to f*** up the world. However, I dont think thats because white people are intrinsically bad. Since the colonial era, Europe and European-derived countries (eg the USA) have been the dominant world powers. If historically it had been Africans or Aztecs or Japanese in that position, they may well have done the same terrible things, because power is by nature corrupting. But as it happened, it was white people. Of course, European civilisation has contributed a lot of good things to the world, no doubt. But along with that comes a whole lotta pain and suffering.
no_slappz jeri, you wrote:
on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 01:30:50
You mentioned that Africa has civil wars and that the Hutus slaughtered the Tutsis. What does this have to do with white people justifying slavery? Slavery has been outlawed since the Civil War 145 years ago. Thus, no whites have justified slavery for at least that many years. Meanwhile, the civil wars in Africa are ongoing slaughter occurring on a daily basis in countries including Liberia and Somalia. You wrote:
11 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
Evil is evil, whether white people do it or black people do it. The fact that there has been civil wars in Africa doesnt justify the behavior of evil white people. Nobody justified evil behavior. However, you seem to think there is a reason to recall legalized slavery that ended almost 150 years ago while ignoring blacks slaughtering blacks TODAY. You wrote: Why is it whenever black people talk about the evils that white people have done in this country, you want to go to a completely different topic. Again, you and many other blacks have an unhealthy desire to present slavery as though whites in America own black slaves TODAY. You wrote: No one said that black people couldnt commit an evil act. What Abagond was saying that to say that was the times doesnt justify past evil acts. You seem confused by the concepts of justification versus explanation. Explaining WHY is not Justification. Meanwhile, when written, the US Constitution conferred less-than-human status on blacks, which was the legal basis for declaring that blacks were NOT citizens and therefore NOT entitled to the protections and rights granted to whites. Considering the unambiguous wording of the Constitution, it would have been bizarre for whites to have seen blacks as equals at any time before the Civil War. By the way, the same logic that permitted slavery is used to permit abortion. Blacks were considered less than human and therefore denied the human rights granted to whites. Following the same line of reasoning, a fetus is considered less than human and is therefore also denied the right to life granted to everyone who has survived the birthing process.
no_slappz eurasian sensation, you wrote:
on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 01:51:07
Want to know what I mean? Lets look at history. You could start by counting the number of indigenous people who died in the Americas and Australia during the time of European colonialisation. Thats an interesting thought. Except that it means very little. It might even be possible to develop a reasonable estimate of the number of people killed by in the Age of Conquest. So what? The history of man is the history of conquest through the ages. However, the number you cannot provide, or even estimate, is the number of blacks slaughtered by blacks in Africa. Why? Because no one was keeping records until whites arrived on the African continent. But its safe to say that slaughter after slaughter occurred for a few thousand years The slaughter goes on today, resulting from direct violence as well as the out-of-control spread of
12 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
AIDS and the barely suppressed death toll from various water-borne diseases. You wrote: You could then count the number of African and Asian countries ruthlessly exploited by European powers. Hutus slaughtered 800,000 Tutsis in 1994. Blacks killing blacks. No whites involved. And thats how it has been in Africa for a long long time. You wrote: You could think about the Chinese Opium War, in which the British went to war with China for the right to sell heroin to the Chinese, who were trying to rid their country of the drug. You need a history lesson. For two reasons. First, the opium trade was retaliation for high demand in Great Britain for Chinese goods offset by low demand in China for British goods. Second, when it comes to death tolls, the Opium War and the Opium Trade were nothing compared with Chairman Mao and communist takeover of China. Mao executed probably 100 million Chinese during his tenure. You wrote: Then you could consider with the USAs history of fomenting civil wars all over the world and overthrowing democratically elected governments because they were too far left for the USAs liking. The US overthrowing Democratically Elected Governments? Name ONE. However, maybe its news to you, but al Qaeda and other muslim terrorist groups are working for the overthrow of the US government. Are you excited by the idea of becoming a citizen in a muslim theocracy where, as a woman, you would lose ALL your rights and freedoms?
Aiyo @Angel
on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 05:35:59
You beat me to it I was about to write the same thing about Asian and African dotors LOL
Eurasian Sensation on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 05:44:55 @ no_slappz: Im told by others on this thread that I should ignore you. So I will only add 3 quick points: 1. Im not a woman. 2. Im not a US citizen. 3. Your argument but non-whites were doing it too belongs in the schoolyard. Just because Africans, Chinese and Muslims are all capable of atrocities and oppression does not make it all right for white people to do it. And since white people have held the most power in this world for several hundred years, what they have inflicted upon others is the most significant. There is a reason that the majority of countries in the world today have a European language as their official language, and its not because one day they just thought it was a good idea.
13 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
That will be all from me to you.
abagond on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 06:13:04 Calling the years 1500 to 1900 a European Age of Conquest to excuse genocide is itself an example of it was the times!
Mira on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 10:33:48 I think It was the times is a sad excuse when used as an excuse. However, it was the times can- and should- be used to understand what was going on in a specific time period, to understand motives, actions and the world of those people. Like Abagonds example with baby girls in Ancient Greece. Its impossible to understand people- even (or, especially) your enemies- if you dont understand their motives. It was the times should not be used only for times that was past long time ago. You have some pretty recent examples, with, say, previous American president. About the European genocide- I am sad people are not talking about it the way it should be talked about. It was genocide, period. However, that doesnt change the fact that, in order to understand what was going on, you need to know a lot about that time period. If nothing else, to never repeat those mistakes, or to be able to see it coming again. Saying- they were just evil crazy people is not enough- in fact, it is, in my opinion, disrespectful to the victims. Past is not that simple. Humans are not that simple. Thats why history and archaeology exist- to research and try to find answers. If answers they were evil was good enough, history and archaeology wouldnt exist. On the other hand, history and archaeology can- and were (still are) used in a wrong way. That is another thing we should talk about. But in any case, theyre evil, period doesnt help at all.
Angel on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 13:24:47 Aiyo, I think we think along the same lines LOL. Abagond needs to do a post on the breakdown of White families in England and how as a result, the same issues affecting the Black community because of the breakdown of the family unit are affecting them as well All the tough high paying courses have Asians, Africans, and while there are some Whites in these courses, they are generally the minority here in England
no_slappz eurasian sensation, you wrote:
on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 16:00:07
3. Your argument but non-whites were doing it too belongs in the schoolyard. Just because Africans, Chinese and Muslims are all capable of atrocities and oppression does not make it all right for white people to do it.
14 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
Human society develops at varying rates. Obviously white society moved into the future faster than black society, which was incapable of recording its own African history until whites arrived and started taking notes. More important is the fact that believing each human life is precious is a recent development. However, it is one that muslims today do not fully accept. Prominent muslims have repeatedly told America that muslims love death more than we love life. They proved their point during the Iran/Iraq War of 1980-1988, when about ONE MILLION muslims died. You wrote: And since white people have held the most power in this world for several hundred years, what they have inflicted upon others is the most significant. Obviously your knowledge of history is terribly weak. NO US president has ever been to China until Nixon went there in 1972. Before then, the West had had very little contact with China. Sure, the West bought tea and silk from China, but that amounts to spare change when it comes to international trade. Meanwhile, China has had a nuclear bomb since about 1962, making China one of the worlds major military powers. As I said, Chairman Mao executed an estimated 100 million Chinese as he consolidated his power over the nation of ONE BILLION people. Today, the population is approaching 1.5 BILLION. Furthermore, white influence in Africa largely ended around 1960 when most European colonial powers departed. Today, white influence in Africa is limited to attempting to assist African nations extract, refine and sell their natural resources. But the corruption of African rulers means the rulers steal most of the money. See Nigeria. You wrote: There is a reason that the majority of countries in the world today have a European language as their official language, and its not because one day they just thought it was a good idea. Really? So in your fantasy world, English, French, German, Italian, Dutch or Portuguese are the official languages of China, India, Japan, Russia, the former Soviet republics, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Cambodia, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, On the other hand, societies gain a lot when there is a common language linking one with another. Muslims created the Ottoman Empire, and the chief accomplishment of the Ottoman Empire was spreading the Arabic language over a large segment of the worlds population. However, today, Spanish is probably spoken in more countries than any other language. But English is the language of business. When it comes to language, Africa is, as always, a mess. How many languages are spoken there? Two hundred? Bottom line it IS a good idea if as many people as possible speak the same language.
15 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
no_slappz abagond, you wrote:
on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 16:15:08
Calling the years 1500 to 1900 a European Age of Conquest to excuse genocide is itself an example of it was the times! Your contemporary view that killing large numbers of people is genocide was not part of anyones thinking in earlier eras. Moreover, disease was a far bigger killer than conquering invaders. The Black Plague killed probably ONE-THIRD of the worlds population. No conquerors ever came close to that one. Bottom line, the factors motivating nations and societies in the distant past are no longer significant with respect to the leading nations of the world. If you want a better world, then you should demand that more nations follow the models established by todays leading democracies.
abagond Wow. This is so sad seeing grown men lie to themselves.
on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 17:15:39
Thad on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 19:33:08 Your contemporary view that killing large numbers of people is genocide was not part of anyones thinking in earlier eras. Correct, but this is sophism at its worst. The concept of genocide was born after WWII to specifically describe the Holocaust. HOWEVER, the killing of millions of people was not thought to be a good thing before 1945. The United States, for example, was damned aware that it was eliminating the Indians and this was generally classified as a tragedy in the strict Greek sense of the world. It was well known who was killing and who was dying and it was will established by all and sundry that this was a bad thing. It went on anyhow because, frankly, the Indians were in the way of a lot of people making a lot of money. But they certainly knew it was wrong back in the day. Dont delude yourself that, just because they didnt have the word genocide, they couldnt perceive the concept at work.
abagond on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 19:41:22 Right. The word racism was not used till 1936 but that does not mean there were no racists before that time.
Mira on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 19:45:54 However, it is important to note many people refuse to use those strong words (genocide, racism) Like it would change anything. But wait a minute it DOES change a lot of
16 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
things. Unfortunate killings of Native Americans doesnt sound so horrible as genocide. In reality, however, genocide, racism (and so many other words- democracy, for example) are just words. Assigning meaning to them and applying those words can influence peoples views on certain historical issues.
Eurasian Sensation on Thu 25 Feb 2010 at 05:27:16 Even if the concept of genocide had not been invented yet, European nations in general followed a Christian ethos, even moreso than today. Central to the Christian ethos is thou shalt not kill. And thou shalt not steal. These existed back then just as it does now. So even by their own standards, white people in the age of colonialism were doing the wrong thing in stealing land and killing off many of the inhabitants. But they justified it to themselves, primarily by telling themselves (conveniently) that non-whites were not fully deserving of human status.
Uncle Milton To Jalylah:
on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 07:16:26
Thats why you dont see many black doctors. Racial preferences doesnt apply to medical schools. Not true: http://www.acri.org/blog/2009/08/12/racial-preferences-and-medical-school
Uncle Milton on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 07:23:43 So even by their own standards, white people in the age of colonialism were doing the wrong thing in stealing land and killing off many of the inhabitants. How would you describe the conquering of Ireland by the British..? Poland by the Germans and Russians? The number of deaths in the 30 years war was tremendous: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years%27_War#Casualties_and_disease So great was the devastation brought about by the war that estimates put the reduction of population in the German states at about 15% to 30%.[49] Some regions were affected much more than others.[50] For example, Wrttemberg lost three-quarters of its population during the war.[51] In the territory of Brandenburg, the losses had amounted to half, while in some areas an estimated two-thirds of the population died.[52] The male population of the German states was reduced by almost half.
Eurasian Sensation @ Uncle Milton:
on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 08:43:03
17 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
thats terrible stuff, no doubt. But I confess Im not sure what your point is.
Uncle Milton To Eurasian Sensation:
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 05:12:53
So even by their own standards, white people in the age of colonialism were doing the wrong thing in stealing land and killing off many of the inhabitants. But they justified it to themselves, primarily by telling themselves (conveniently) that non-whites were not fully deserving of human status. and thats terrible stuff, no doubt. But I confess Im not sure what your point is. Sorry if I wasnt clear, you wont get an argument from me that the treatment of indigenous peoples in the Americas was horrible but there were definitely times when Europeans behaved in a similar manner to other Europeans. I guess this was off topic.. I wanted to comment on Lincoln but I confess I had not read much of his writing. That said, in the US, (youre Australia right?) most of the people who slam Lincoln and claim that the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery are White Supremacists and Neo-Confederates so I wonder if some of his quotes are taken dramatically out of context.
Y on Sun 4 Apr 2010 at 01:25:33 My roommates boyfriend brought up this yesterday argument and said he counters it with a hypothetical: Would you say the same thing about Hitler and the Jewish Holocaust?
Kiernan820 on Fri 9 Apr 2010 at 16:40:39 My African-Cherokee-American bride of 28 years knows a lot about U.S. History and the topic of slavery in the U.S. She has two degrees in History and her favorite reading materials are biographies of people who lived in the U.S. during the 17th, 18th, and 19th century. She can usually hold her own on the topic of slavery with people who have PhDs focusing on the U.S. colonies. Following this weeks controversy following the proclamation by the Virginia Governor and the hours of talking heads that followed on MSNBC she decided to poke around the internet regarding slavery in the Colony of Virginia. She found this and was surprised on many levelshttp://en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Anthony_Johnson_(American_Colonial) Anyone else surprised that the first court case in Virginia focusing on slaves-as-property might have been regarding an African slave owner in the U.S.?
J Book:
on Fri 9 Apr 2010 at 16:54:14
18 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
Black Slaveowners: Free Black Slave Masters in South Carolina, 1790-1860
Kiernan820 on Fri 9 Apr 2010 at 16:59:09 My wife has this one. One of the surprising things to my wife about the Anthony Johnson article was the 17th century date, and the very early (maybe the earliest?) court case involving people as property in Virginia. And the irony the winning litigant being an African slave owner.
J I am slightly confused here, was not the issue
on Fri 9 Apr 2010 at 17:14:48
However on his death in 1670 a court ruled that: as a black man, Anthony Johnson was not a citizen of the colony, and allowed his lands to be seized . as opposed to Anyone else surprised that the first court case in Virginia focusing on slaves-as-property might have been regarding an African slave owner in the U.S.?
19 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
J Having gone through the link, we see:
on Fri 9 Apr 2010 at 17:25:14
1. Slavery was officially established in Virginia IN 1654, when Anthony Johnson, a black man, CONVINCED A COURT that his servant (also black) John Casor was his for life. Johnson himself had been brought to Virginia some years earlier as an indentured servant (a person who must work to repay a debt, or on contract for so many years in exchange for food and shelter) but he saved enough money to buy out the remainder of his contract and that of his wife. The court ruled in Johnsons favor, and the very first officially state-recognized slave existed in Virginia. Johnson eventually became very wealthy and began importing his own black slaves from Africa. [15] 2. After Johnsons death in 1670, a court ruling set a PRECEDENT that would be an important factor IN DETERMINING THE SOCIAL STATUS OF FREED BLACK MEN IN THE COLONIES. A white Virginian planter was allowed to seize Johnsons land because a ruling by a local court that said, as a black man, Anthony Johnson was not a citizen of the colony. [13]
Kiernan820 on Fri 9 Apr 2010 at 17:34:46 Heres the citation from the end of the article and perhaps I should have included it in my dashed-off post. It regards his indentured servent/slave, and that persons freedom suit. The servant thought he would be freed like those before him, but the case determined that he was property Slavery was officially established in Virginia in 1654, when Anthony Johnson, a black man, convinced a court that his servant (also black) John Casor was his for lifeThe court ruled in Johnsons favor, and the very first officially state-recognized slave existed in Virginia. Johnson eventually became very wealthy and began importing his own black slaves from Africa. [15] For those who like novels, heres a Pulitzer winner about Black slave owners, that my wife cherishes:
20 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
The Known World
Kiernan820 J, I think our posts crossed through the ether.
on Fri 9 Apr 2010 at 17:43:25
I wasnt referencing the aftermath of Johnsons death, but the (surprisingly) early court case that estalished humans as property in Virginia. And my wifes surprise at it, given her knowledge on the topic of slavery. Does anyone know of an earlier court case that established humans as property in the colonies?
Ankhesen Mi on Sun 3 Oct 2010 at 02:41:59 When evil becomes commonplace it is still evil. Just because everyone does it does not make it right. Nor do moral ideas advance as much as people seem to think. Nearly 2,000 years ago Jesus Christ said to do unto others as you would have others do unto you the Golden Rule. A simple idea known throughout the West down through the ages and one that is enough to condemn racism, slavery, Hitler and all the rest.
21 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
Thank you, Abagond. Above all, I think I detest this particular argument the most. It goes right in hand with the juvenile thinking behind Arab Trader. Merci, mon cher.
chroniclinghate on Tue 14 Dec 2010 at 11:01:14 The argument has a degree of truth but the American slavery wasnt evil by the standards of the time bilge fails completely and the people using it are ignorant of basic 19th century history. Slavery was not a universal accepted practice in the 19th century West, the British for example abolished slavery in the 19th century, individual US states abolished slavery in the 18th century so it was not acceptable by 19th century standards.
Aaron on Sat 29 Oct 2011 at 07:39:38 I am not from the U.S. What is this entry trying to argue? No one in their right mind would argue that slavery, followed by Jim Crow and segregation, were not wrong and evil. They were just as wrong and evil back then as we consider them now, but that doesnt mean we shouldnt consider WHY slavery of Africans was considered acceptable, or why Jim Crow laws and segregation were considered normal and just in the South for 100 years (and beyond by many) after the end of legal slavery. Even IF it were true, the explanation that all whites are innately racist and evil would fail to adequately address such broad and complex historical issues. For slavery, I would offer these points to consider: Life was harsher back then, and because of that many people were even more ignorant and hard-headed than they are now. Most people were not educated. The ideas and attitudes of the average say 18th century white person in the Thirteen Colonies on race were undeveloped, unsophisticated, easily manipulated to a world view where whites were superior. When youre more or less hand-to-mouth living as an uneducated subsistence farmer, mill-worker, etc doing back-breaking work 14 hours a day, 6 days a week. Of course the MOST back-breaking (and often back-whipping) work was assigned to slaves captured and imported from Africa. Slaves from Africa were captured and sold by merchants (often government sanctioned) from several European nations, as well as from the American colonies, Arabs, and other Africans. Europeans, Arabs, and Africans captured and sold other Africans because there was a high demand for slaves, and because whatever underdeveloped moral scruples they might have had were pushed down by a desire for profit. Slave catchers and traders (of whatever race) were hard men, who did evil things and engaged in a horrific enterprise for money. I know how simplistic that sounds, but if there is money up for grabs doing something legal (or even just unregulated), you will always find those unscrupulous men willing to do it. No one was going to stop those dudes all the way down in Africa, even if some European power wanted to stop the slave trade, they wouldnt want to spend money, and potentially risk war with slave trading nations, just to help foreign people down in far-off sub-saharan Africa. And I suppose African societies lacked the war-making capabilities (both technological and organizational) or political will to expel slave traders (with modern weapons and protected by forts) from the African coasts. The upper classes in the Thirteen Colonies (and everywhere else African slaves were brought) held similarly underdeveloped and self-serving views about race and about the humanity of Africans, but even if they were educated (and thus had perhaps a better idea that slavery was wrong) rich white land-owners were willing to take the self-serving aspect to whole new levels by using unpaid agricultural and domestic labour to profit enormously and live in luxury (now the corporations go to
22 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
southeast Asia to save money on labour, and rich white Americans use hispanic illegals to do the dirty work around the house), The slave trade was driven by the greed of European governments (see slave colonies run by European powersas part of empire) and rich white land-owners, and enabled by white societies consenting to it, due to racist rationalizations (Africans as sub-humans, white people as superior/civilized) which white people ate up. So I guess what Im saying, is yeah, it was the times. Because most of human history were some ass harsh times full of evil and misery. The Africans who were enslaved were the unwitting victims of the greed and racism of Europeans and European colonists (including British ones who would eventually found the United States). Ideas of race were underdeveloped back then, which allowed Europeans . Functionally, the enslavement of Africans was an unprecedented mass forced migration enabled by improved ocean-faring ship technology. It was fundamentally wrong and evil and cruel and de-humanizing, and white people back then should have been able to realize that. But they didnt. Those in the South who clung to slavery had to be forced to give it up. I just would like to know in what way I am looking at this wrong. It was the times! What is wrong with saying that? Im not saying it makes it right, its just an explaination! America was built on racism! Im not denying it! Racism against the peoples who originally lived here (Natives Americans), racism against Africans, racism against Mexicans and other Latin Americans, racism against Jews, certainly racism against any people more exotic than that (East Asians, Muslims, Indians, Polynesians), for a long time even racism against people of European descent (Irish, Scots, Italians, French, Polish, etc.) who werent of English Protestant background. Racism courses through the veins of American history, and it may be impossible to make the changes necessary to fully purge it from American society, from white American culture (it remains at an often sub-conscious level). As for Jim Crow segregation and terrorizing of black in the South for 100 years after the end of legal slavery, I do not know enough to account for the awe-inspiring and horrifying hatred and racism and laughable unwillingness to change that the white South has consistently demonstrated. Jim Crow was unfathomably evil. Its the kind of mindless irrational hatred that humanity seems to have a boundless capacity for harbouring. What is wrong with white southerners? Why did they have to be forced to forced to give up slavery via a brutal Civil War? Why did they have to be forced to give up legal segregation in the 1950s and 60s? Why did terrorizing of blacks continue long after that (you dont hear about it much in the last two decades though)? Dont get me wrong, I know that in any society some people are just simple-minded and hateful. But in the South the vast majority of whites were fully behind Jim Crow segregation, and even lynchings. And it didnt even end very long ago (and racism in the south is obviously still there), so there is no it was the times explanation for this one. I cant explain it. Maybe someone could explain to me how Southerners were able to sleep at night back then. I mean it seems like segregation just became so normalized in peoples minds, aided by strong racist attitudes against blacks, that they saw nothing wrong with living in a society were blacks were treated as inferior to whites (unworthy of even using the same bathrooms, restaurants and drinking fountains) who could be lynched for looking a white woman the wrong way. Again, I would like an explanation, preferably from a white southerner but anyone will do, as to why white southerners were so cool with living in such a way. Basically, both slaver and Jim Crow segregation were socially accepted by many (and for long periods MOST) whites because they became normalized in peoples minds. And because racism was (and still is, although in much milder form) ingrained in white American culture.
23 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
kal on Tue 23 Oct 2012 at 00:10:45 WHEN WHITE PEOPLE SAY IT WAS THE TIMES OR GET OVER SLAVERY I HEAR YES WE CREATED A SYSTEM IN WHICH WE ENRICHED OURSELVES BY KIDNAPPING RAPING ENSLAVING YOUR KIND WE WILL NEVER RELINQUISH OUR DOMINANCE OVER YOU GOOD LUCK WITH THE COMFORTS OUR UPDATED SYSTEM OF OPPRESSION AFFORDS YOU. YOU WERE NOT MEANT TO ENJOY LIFE AT ALL ANYWAY.
Kwamla on Thu 3 Jan 2013 at 12:05:04 Thanks for posting this Bulanik. Although Ive sent it before. Its needs to be viewed again in its entirety. Its a horrendous history.of Belgiums role in the African Congo. Most Black people and particular African-Americans do not know or understand this history of the European powers in Africa. But there is a <b<DIRECT LINK to their own treatment and experience of growing up Black in a racist white America. Its not enough to protest and challenge accusations of racism and inequalities in your own country. You have to be able to understand the nature and history of this in all POC.. And the direct link to all this sufferings is Africas past and present exploitations by countries like: UK, France (Belgium here) Germany etcand of course now the US .
sam on Thu 3 Jan 2013 at 22:34:15 There was one finnish guy as a steam boat captain in Congo at the time. He was there for few years but quit because he could not take it anymore. Too much horror. They made an documentary about that guy but I could not find it to put up the link.
Kwamla on Sun 6 Jan 2013 at 19:57:54 This video helps bring people up to date on what is still going on in the Congo today as a direct result of Belgiums genocidal legacy
B. R.
24 of 45
on Wed 9 Jan 2013 at 10:32:52
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
Kwamla, as an admirer of many things you have said and information you have brought in, it gives me no pleasure to have to point out the parts that were left out of the youtube you have brought in, which turns out to be a perfect example of the USA is at fault for everything First of all, looking at the part where they go over how the USA just supported dictators in the Congo in the Cold War, there is a tremendous empty space about the total picture that was going on thensomething is seriously missing..I feel we can actualy dig out the grave of Che Gueverra, pull out is stank skeleton, put some make up on him and a beret and bring him up on stage to hold hands to take a nice bow with the USA in this period as an example of part of the exploitation of the CongoBECAUSE THE SOB WAS ACTUALY THEREAND NOT TO PLAY PATTYCAKEhe was bringing his notion of Marxist revolution with total backing from Castro with Soviet money.Cuba was in 17 countries in Africacontributing to their violent Marxist revolution solutions..to not include this aspect in the Cold War examination of the Congo, is seriously ommiting an aspect of the truthor does anyone actualy think a communist revolution was a valid solution with all the miserable flawed failures its brought on the world? Its a real blessing sometimes to live in a country that has brainwashed itself about America, the newspaper critics, books, docus etc, that actualy are praising people like Che or Fidel, actualy are rich fontes of information of what they really did, exaulting Cuba was a rich center of revolutionaries from all over the world training to fight their revolutions, or , details about Che in the Congo..which really makes them all imperialistic as the USA in every aspect And, to you , Sam and Legion , who implied I was so worried about commies , and to relax its been dead for 15 years,or , Legions they came for the communists poem..you dont get it.Im not one of these Obama is a socialist.. watch out for the commies , i live with the commies down here, they ran a candidate for mayer, thank god they lost, they slicked up their promos instead of the older hype comercails with Soviet work songs in the background and the unbeleivible dogmad drek that dribbles from their mouthhave I heard the crumpled up Soviet propaganda page with Fidels snot on it? You bet I have, and can smell it a mile away? hades yes.no , its not about being afraid of the commies, its about listening to skewed, half truths, manipulations or outright lies, about Americas Cold War history and then being patronised like Im afraid of commies of something when I just bring up the truth. The second thing about the youtube was the part where it actualy blames the USA for being guilty ??!! I mean did I hear that right? Because I can guarentee you that if the USA dropped one boot on the ground and one body got dropped because of that, Kwamla, you would scream bloody murderthe USA is criticised if they do something or dont do something..the USA has become the conveniant boogy man to look at with backwards binoculars and only focus on them to hide the responsibility when in fact, there is plenty of blame to go around in a big way to everyoneThe misrepresentation of the truth in this youtube can only make me skeptical at the other claims of where the wealth is going and who really benafits.and make no mistake, Im not trying to get the USA off the hook for the blame of what happened in the Congo or Africa, its just that it is pure hypocracy to not look at the whole picture and what is going on The truth is, as I have stated before, its much more complex than some simple break down that it is all the fault of the USAmy gosh, the far right tries to fear monger , the far left tries to guilt tripthey can all kiss my behind..i find immence flaws in both sides logic, and Im interested in the truth. This blog, that is a high leval discusion referance for issues about racism, becomes anemic and one sided misinformed about the truth when it comes to discusions about American international policies in the worldnothing wrong with criticising American policies, just do it in the context of the truth, not
25 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
manipulations and agendas that push half truths and lies Just in the week Ive been laying out, Ive seen cookie cutter, cliched descriptions of the Viet Nam war, corrected niclely by Ann, Ive seen Sayyid Qutb and his fanatical fundamentalist Islamic beleifs manipulated into some kind of link against white racism when he is as racist as any white American racist, he is closer to Oral Roberts than any ideological hookup with Martin Luther King. And basicly one sided, narrow minded, conspiricy theory informed looks at American policies in the international world . I still intend to be listening more but, some things deserved to be checked or people are going to start thinking its the truth
sam @BR:
on Wed 9 Jan 2013 at 13:34:58
Communism as you understand it has been dead for MORE than 20 years by now. Che Guevara has been dead for MORE than fifty. And you still get on and on about him and that communism? I really do not get it, pal. And if communism or socialism somehow miracously ressurects, who do you blame? Dead guys or the ones who make the world such a place that even the dreadful communism begins to look like a nice alternative? American style of social politics, unequality, filthy rich controlling the whole society, corrupt political system etc. are just what you should worry about if you are really affraid of communism. There is no better insurance against communism than good healthcare system and social security. But do americans understand this? No they do not. American media and politcians have been on a crusade against european model for fifty years and finally it looks like they might topple it via the biggest robbery of human history (the Euro crisis which was made by american, german and french banks who lended money countries which could have never paid those loians back and then came knockin on the door of us others and got their money, with intrest, by extortion and threats). Sad side effect of this is that in many European countries right wing extremism is on the rise. In Greece neo fascist party is one of the biggest, In Hungary neo nazi party and its paramilitary wing are even in the government. All this thanks to the amwerican style of capitalism. In USA the System is upheld by the police who capture, punish and wipe out any serious threat to the system. Real political opponents and any who is deemed to be dangerous to the system is killed, jailed, ruined or all of the fore said. That is why Martin Luther King was killed too. And many, many others. The right wing government of George W. Bush was spying 20 000 americans under the auspicies of the anti terrorism laws. Guess how many of them were terrorists? Yeap. None. People have been jailed under the terrorism laws because they have been found guilty of street terrorism, what ever that is. Money that was supposed to go in New Orleans after Katrina got just lost somewhere. Billions of dollars of it. That is the american way. Now if anything, it is that way which makes some people see communism an alternative. We who remember what it was and how it was, do not want it. But if you are 25, have no job, no future, no home or nothing, you just might think about it and go for it. Anything but the american way.
26 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
But then again, those millions of jobless and poor young in Europe might choose facism instead of communism. It has happened before. Why? Because the Big Money has always backed it up believing it can control facists. So you might begin to wonder which sounds more appealing, a communist Europe or fascist one, after the american capitalists have had their way over here. Because iof the so called European model is gone, it will be replaced by some other and these two are right from here.
B. R. on Thu 10 Jan 2013 at 06:02:35 Yeah, Sam, I hate hyper capatalism,lets bash that also, as much as communismand, we have reams and reams of material on this blog that does expose it for exactly what it is.dont we? But once again, what is your problem going on about communism is dead? Are you actualy not getting what I am saying, or do you have your agenda? Because, Sam, in the looks at American policies on this blog, people like you are going over things in the cold war and incriminating American actions with out giving the whole story and pictureexactly like this youtube Kwamla brought in.And you know the truth, but you wont link it in when you discuss American international history Do you like dealing in half truths, Sam? The far right does, they do it all the time,same with the far left I dontIve come to the strong desiire in looking at international policies of the USA, to look at the whole truth of the story.I like to see it in the entire context that it goes down in Ive also come to really desire total responsibility by all parties involved in conflicts, including, the oposing sides that invite in super powers to get their aid and training and weapons and help to do fighting. Interesting how you would again, blame USA policies for people picking far right attitudes Seriously, Sam, why would you ever not want to state the whole truth about looking at the past conflicts that America got into? Ive stated many times on here the dirt I think America didIraq was disgusting, but, Ann made a very good point on the other thread, that no one mentions the Korrean War and how South Korrea is a thriving country while North Korrea is stuck in the stone ageI always think that too, Im just commenting less and didnt come in on that one. And you did make a very cookie cutter description and she was much more in deptheven if you could pick at those points you did.her view was more acurate and truth Again , Sam, what I get about you is that, you are buying into a lot of anti American biasyou may not be seething in resentments, but you are buying into the brain washing that is running all over Europe and Brazil /South America nowtrying to re write history and leaving out half the truthby all means , lets criticise the bad things about America, but, in the context of the whole truthotherwise, its just a flawed agenda
Kwamla @ B.R Question:

27 of 45
on Thu 10 Jan 2013 at 14:14:11
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
Is it possible for you to sum up in just one paragraph what you wish to say. Or better still itemised as bullet points? Youve been rambling now on multiple threads but its hard to be clear on what you are actually saying? Perhaps take more time to compose your thoughts before you type themjust a suggestion
Legion Thirded^^ ^can i say that?
on Thu 10 Jan 2013 at 17:06:57
B.R. you dont have to say things others will like or agree with but you need to be clear with what you are saying. Your comments on Child victims of Drones are a goddamn mess. For real man, step it up! Kwamlas suggestion wont just benefit someone who reads you, it will also benefit you. As you organize your points more youll get a better idea of what you yourself think about some issue. Your comments on Child victims of Drones dont seem like real thoughts that youve meditated on. They seem more like received dogma that youre committed to cling on to. Those are two very different mental states. One is of a relatively free person, the other of a not so free person. Ultimately, following Kwamlas suggestion will benefit you far more than it will anyone who reads you. But it is good for all concerned too. Win-win.
Legion @B.R.
on Thu 10 Jan 2013 at 17:28:33
And, to you , Sam and Legion , who implied I was so worried about commies Not once did I explicitly say nor imply that you were concerned about communists. or , Legions they came for the communists poem. I am surprised that you are missing the point of Niemollers quote. I will make a further comment on the child victims of drones thread when time permits me to do so.
sam @BR:
on Thu 10 Jan 2013 at 17:37:14
Seriously, Sam, why would you ever not want to state the whole truth about looking at the past conflicts that America got into? Ok, which ones you wish to talk about? Congo in the early 60s? Vietnam in the 50s? Central America since 1940s? Europe where the CIA and US foreign policy makers backed up neo facist terrorists in Italy who exploded a train in Bologna killing more than 80 people? Or as in Greece in
28 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
1940s and 50s where CIA was killing people who it judged to be communist, even though some were not? Or Chile, where CIA orchestrated a military coup against socialist, not communist president who had been elected by majority of the voter in free elections? Or China where US waged a secret war against any and every threat during 1940s? Notice that in every Asian country US was backing up some party, they all ended up with communist dictatorships. I wonder why? Why people of China dd not want those guys USA was backing?? Why Mao won? WW2? Glad the US got in it, little late as usual but never the less. But it was the Red army that defeated nazis. Thats is a fact,. Yeap, those MF red russkies did it. You guys helped a lot and it was more than good thing that Stalin did not swallow the whole continent. That we are grateful. But not about the support that US government gave to the european dictatorships or how it orchestrated murders of those it considered commies. Again , Sam, what I get about you is that, you are buying into a lot of anti American biasyou may not be seething in resentments, but you are buying into the brain washing that is running all over Europe and Brazil /South America nowtrying to re write history and leaving out half the truthby all means , lets criticise the bad things about America, but, in the context of the whole truthotherwise, its just a flawed agenda Like Ive said many many times; I love american culture, food, movies, music, arts, litterature, I even have friends over there. What makes me mad is that I know what that country could be and for some strange reason is wont. I just do not understand that completely. You think there is some sort of anti american brainwashing going on in Europe right now?? Wake up, man. Today Europe and europeans are almost pro US compared what they were thinking in the 60s or 80s during those Reagan days. What many europeans do not like is the self satisfied arrogance your government has and which you for excample seem to support. It is the old Quiet american thing: young american guy goes into Vietnam after the Indo China war and thinks he knows better than the locals what they need and how they should fight the war and against they should fight. You killed off dictator Saddam Hussein in Irak and wonder why that country decended into the chaos? You find it strange that the afgans do not appreciate how you are fighting for their freedom? You should have asked Alexander the Great. Afgans do not want anybody from outside in their country, specially telling them how to live and when. That is really old thing, like more than 200 years old thing of theirs. But once again, what is your problem going on about communism is dead? It is dead. The ideology which you are so scared died out more than twenty years ago and yet you talk about it like it is sleeping in some remote forest, ready to jump up and go on like it never was away. It is not going to happen. Never. What will happen is that there will be so-called communist movements, because the american ideology liberalist capitalism, the ideas of Freedman etc. are forced on nations by your government, your banks, your institutions etc. Hopefully it will stay in that direction but I doubt. Facism is on the rise in Europe as we speak and that is thanks to the policies american consultants, banks and US government have demanded past fifty years. I just saw an interview with the leader of the neo nazi party of Hungary, which is on the parliament and I think in their government too. He talked about faceless capitalism, global businesses, big
29 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
american banks etc. You see? Your very own policies are the incubator of these extremist movements. And you keep on talking about a guy who was killed more than fifty years ago! Ive also come to really desire total responsibility by all parties involved in conflicts, including, the oposing sides that invite in super powers to get their aid and training and weapons and help to do fighting. I assume you mean soviet government or USSR? Well, how they could take any responsibility any more? They do not exist anymore. They are gone. The whole system is gone. Those reds are really dead. Russia? Well, in todays Russia millionaires pay some 13% taxes on any amount of income or propety or money etc. Russia has more billionaires than any other country in the world. Abramovitsh bought the Chelsea Football Club for a hobby. He spends about 200 million dollars in it every year, and that is his hobby. He likes soccer. Besides, show me a single conflict today in which russian are backing up the side which opposes US troops. Yep. There is not one. Iran? Iran is hardly a super power. China? They fight with business and money now. Not with troops. And they sell weapons at the global free markets to anyone who wants to buy their toys, just like USA, France, Germany or UK. Look, I understand that it bugs you when people are critizising your country, but you have to understand: this blog is not to praise USA. This blog is not even to praise the Europe. This is about racism, first and foremost, and the USA happens to be the only country in the world today where racism is ingrained in official policies of the government on federal and state level. It just is that way. In Europe there is racism as well, in some parts a lot of it, but in any country it is not part of the official system as it is in USA. That is the difference. It might change quickly if the xenophobic parties gain more support as the social situation in Europe gets worse and worse, thanks to the adopted american social models. Then we will have huge problems because we had the WW2 for racist ideology. When people, sometimes rightly and sometimes for no good reason, crtizes Europe I do not start to rant and rave about anti european attitudes or brainwashing. I know there is lot of wrongs in Europe. This is not a Shangrila. When people talk about racism in my country, I do not get upset. I know it is here. So why you talk so much about anti-americanism? Why do you see it here? That is something you should be thinking about.
Kwamla @ Sam
on Thu 10 Jan 2013 at 18:06:08
Some well ordered factual points narrated in a historical context Sam. Its refreshing to read. Id say what youve written here is an excellent historical summary. So just what is B.R complaining about?
Legion I am briefly off topic:
on Thu 10 Jan 2013 at 18:44:33
30 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
(I even remember saying to Abagond last year that European racism was an interesting and important area for him to feature more, as Europe is where the white folks originally came from! LOL.) This might be better handled by guest posts.* European racism or just race relations are also addressed somewhat by having an increase in comments by Europeans. For example, I was delighted to discover that Eco is Polish. *I am not hinting at anything, just making a statement.
Legion ^
on Thu 10 Jan 2013 at 19:24:38
B. R. on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 10:41:56 Sam, thank you for just demonstrating with robotic acuracy, exactly what I am talking about.your total take on the history you have stated is so skewed and anti American biased that it is obvious you have your binoculars on backwards and embedded up the rectum of the USA and cant smell correctly the whole worldto take every situation you just mentoined and go into detail about there was an opisition that was actualy worse, and what made the world really what it is like today, would be a serious waste of my time, since I have already introduced plenty of information that counters many of your claims in a powerful and forceful wayyou called my a liar when I told you there are black scholars that agreed Cuba was racist,you wont even ackowledge they were in 17 countries in Africa and defended them saying millions of people beleived in him all over the worldwhen one hundred million have died because of the totalitarionism of that ideology I brought in extremly relevant and devastating information about South America, and you talk about Chile? Less people were killed there than Che executedDo you , or you, Legion, really want to have a debate about Brazil and what happened down there? Because I will destroy any misconceptions you think you have about the truth. Legion , I brought in extremly relevant and devastating information from Al Jazeera , about Taliban turning children into suicide child bombers and the reality that these fanatics are dealing in, but, that doesnt mean anything to you, you certainly dont have any solution about how to deal with it.And you certainly havnt been following Pakistan, just in the last few days there has been devastating bombs going off killing Islamic civilians in great numbers, but, you dont care about that.what hypocracy..i smell your hypocracy from a mile away But, you really dont care about the truth How many times have I heard on this blog America is the only country that Sam, you lead the charge on that and you are a blatent liarhow many times have I corrected you that Brazil has quotas!!And you just stated that lie above..your arguments with me lose credibility with that logic , and I do support other arguments you make against racists, so its not like I got something against you, Sam . Maybe you and Kwamla and Legion just dont understand because you are too focused on you anti American bias that you just ignore facts that I bring indevastating facts, that cut to the core of your foundations Spare me , Sam, some speech like I dont think we can criticise America, you arnt listening to what I
31 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
am saying, which is typical of you..lets tell the whole truth and then we can have a real discusionhow you can look at Europe politics and only break it down like you did , ignoring the other factors that are making people vote right winged , is typcial of your analysisand, jees, if America didnt wage DDay, and Htiler wasnt so stupid to try to wage war on two fronts, he would have defeated the Soviets
B. R. on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 10:55:59 Kwamla, I tell you what, when you can bring in youtubes about American foreign policies that can make more sence, maybe Ill make more sence, because, I just cant make any sence of a youtube history of the Congo that goes over the cold war period and just doesnt even mention that Che himself was on the scene to create a bloody revolutionyou do know that that is his schtick , right? Make a bloody revolution , like the Marxist manual tells them to doyou do know that many of the people in South America that wanted a bloody revolution, that they chose to study in Cuba, China, and the Soviet Union, how to make bombs, assasinate people, kidnap people, and rob banks, were inspired by Cheand his bloody revolutionhow could we not mention that in an acurate analysis of the Congo, is beyond me and confusing And, the real confusing data that was on the youtube of the 9/11 conspiricy you brought in as an argument against me.I mean, for real , Kwamla, that was so filled with blatent holes and falsities, with maybe some anomolies I can agree with, but, the over all arguments were extremly weak and confusing And by far the strangest youtube you addressed to me to check out was the bizarre call to revolution against the system, with some really strange voice on it, robotic and dogmad, ominous, seriously, Ill stick with Obama and the system before I would follow those people, that was really some strange and confusing advice Ive brought in real facts and truth, if you want to chalk it up to my presentation, well, please, bring in some better youtubes, I think the truth hurts your foundations too much
B. R. on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 12:07:01 I mean , cmon Sam, your whole skeward history lesson has example after example of how the CIA intstigated this and that. And you keep bringing up the Soviets are dead, then why do people like you keep reeling off history in the last 70 years like its from their propaganda page with Fidels snot all over it? How can you condemn the CIA in Brazil when the KGB had spies in the media, the military, the congress and the universities? you hypocrite , you blatent hypocrite!! get a gripguess what, the Soviets (the KGB wasnt invented then) had spies back in the thirties in Brazil and they tried a communist revolution back then.wtf does that tell you, you hypocrite? You do know that the cut and dried CIA coup on the Prime Minister of Iran to put the Shah in, had the agreement of the big relegious leaders , dont you, the ones in power now.it was horrible, I agree about that, the Prime Minister was for the people, and wasnt a communistreally dirty, but, behind the scenes, he was irratating many people and making enemies, to just say it was the CIA only , is naive
32 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
You do know Fidel and Soviet Spies were at the Bogatso in Colombia in the late forties and early fifities, why is your history so skewed , Samits a bunch of half truths why do you like living on half truths? because I can discuss American dirt, but, only in context of the whole picture You dont, you deal in half truths
sam @BR:
on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 12:28:27
I will answer you just for this one more time because it seems to me that you have some serious issues with your understanding. if America didnt wage DDay, and Htiler wasnt so stupid to try to wage war on two fronts, he would have defeated the Soviets Hitler was fighting on two fronts already, well, actually on four when he attacked USSR in 1941. He did not defeat the britts in 1940 in the north, not he had them beaten in north Africa and he was busy in the Balkans fighting the resistance over there. Hitler made the Axis pact with the japanese in full knowledge that it means war against USA too. He was that crazy. Now, US aid to the soviets was important, no doubt about that, but it was the Red army which wiped out Hitlers elite troops, his bets tanks, his best air force, and millions of german and nazi allied soldiers. Like one german veteran who actually fought in Stalningrad said: We believed that when we get to the Volga it will all over, but when we got to the river bank we saw a river than was more than a mile wide and behind that the steppes, we realised that it was all for nothing. The historical fact is that the Red army, those commies, did beat Hitler and nazi Germany. D Day was important, no doubt, but ven the biggest battle in the west, the battle of the Bulge, was just one battle, In the eastern front they had several of such magnitude with more men and material. How many times have I heard on this blog America is the only country that Sam, you lead the charge on that and you are a blatent liarhow many times have I corrected you that Brazil has quotas!!And you just stated that lie above. Perhaps so but the fact is that USA is the only country in the so called west which is interested of the race of its own citizen. It is in every official document, survey, registery etc. Why? Because it wants to know what your race is. Why? Because the system is racist. What use that information has unless race is important for the state? There is no need to know weather mr Hillcox is a caucasian, latino, black, asian etc. if he is american citizen. He is american. Right? So why your own government insists to know weather mr Hillcox is black, latino, caucasian or any other race? Yes, for the racial profiling. And what it is when people are profiled by their race? Yes, that is racism. to take every situation you just mentoined and go into detail about there was an opisition that was actualy worse Ok. Lets just go trough one case, so we do not waste your valuable time. Chile: When socialist
33 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
president Allende won the elections, what he did which was worse than what the american organized military junta did after they had bombed and grenaded the presidential palace and wiped him off? How many thousands of chileans president Allende executed? How many tens of thousands he ordered to be tortured? Cmon, BR. You said you could provide facts on every example I mentioned. Show us now. We do know that the CIA backed and guided military junta murdered thousands and tortured tens of thousands. Now show me the evidence that president Allende and his government murdered more and tortured more. you called my a liar when I told you there are black scholars that agreed Cuba was racist,you wont even ackowledge they were in 17 countries in Africa and defended them saying millions of people beleived in him all over the worldwhen one hundred million have died because of the totalitarionism of that ideology Where did I call you aliar about the Cuba and its racism? Nowhere. Ok, in which countries the cubans were killing millions of Africans. Remember, you claim they were doing this in 17 african countries. I personally only one were they were involved in fighting and that is Angola. And who these milliosn believed? Castro? Che? Lenin? What? I have said more than once on this blog that tens of millions died under communist dictators. So I hardly have denied that. Mihail Gorbatshov said in the politbyro meeting that Staling killed 14 million. Mao killed perhaps 20-35. Pol Pot one million etc. See? I have no problem with that. I do not have to whitewash any one or anything. Legion , I brought in extremly relevant and devastating information from Al Jazeera , about Taliban turning children into suicide child bombers and the reality that these fanatics are dealing in, but, that doesnt mean anything to you, you certainly dont have any solution about how to deal with it.And you certainly havnt been following Pakistan, just in the last few days there has been devastating bombs going off killing Islamic civilians in great numbers, but, you dont care about that.what hypocracy..i smell your hypocracy from a mile away Ill answer for this one too even though you directed this to Legion. American military killed about 250 000 civilians in Irak alone. That is 250 000 civilians. In Vietnam and south east Asia US army killed about one million. In Korea US and its allies killed perhaps a million. But I guess those figures are just collateral damage which really does not count. Taleban was created by the pakistani intelligence services with the support of the CIA. It was supposed to a tool in a fight against those darn russkies and their cohorts and Ahmed Massoud who did not want americans in Afganistan and who fought without american help for the whole USSR-Afgan war. The taleban did not just pop up out from no where. But just like nazis, once they got loose, they started to put their own agenda in action. Most of the original talebans were killed off by USA when it attacked in Afganistan later. Todays taleban is a hodge podge of mercenaries, tribal troops, bandits and what have you who are using the name. It is a good brand over there. They are basically criminals who use religion as their veil. I think pretty much anyone knows what they are doing and what kind of guys they are. But you somehow seem to be hell bent to claim that they are much worse than USA in this crazy killing competition of yours. it is like comparing a secondary school kid to a top class heavy weight boxer. USA military is perhaps the ultimate killing machine in the world today. That is why taleban, who ever is using the name for what ever purpose, kills civilians. That is pretty much their reach. There is nothing more they can do at this time. It is nasty, it is wrong but what is the difference between them
34 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
and US army? US army can kill thousands any time it wants. The taleban never will. how you can look at Europe politics and only break it down like you did , ignoring the other factors that are making people vote right winged Ok. What factors they might be? If you look at the social history of Europe you see that the neo fascist movements began their present rise hand in hand with so called new socvial policies, with the global economics and liberalisation of the economy. All these are agendas which the american policy makers, american companies and the american media has been pushing trough for the last fourty years. I read Newsweek and Time and various other american papers for thirty years. Roughly every in every five years some american big whig was saying on these how the european model is wrong and shoud be donew with. Now it is. Just like they always wanted. And the same pace as the european model has been dismanteled, the neo nazi and neo fascist movements have gained momentum in Europe. That is a fact. Now I ask you show me other factors which make the people support or vote these nazis and fascists. According the hungarian neo nazi politician, these were their agenda. Perhaps you have some others? If you know the history of facism in Europe, you know what made it to grow in Germany and Italy and other countries. You seem to not know that history. And it is said that those who do not know the history are doomed to repeat it. That is what I worry very much. And this colcludes my take on these. Thanks for your patience.
sam @BR:
on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 12:33:19
guess what, the Soviets (the KGB wasnt invented then) had spies back in the thirties in Brazil and they tried a communist revolution back then This unfortunately tells me that you really do not know the history at all. KGB is a name, not the organisation. The organisation has changed its name several times during the past 80 years. It was Tseka under Felix Dzerdzinski, the founding father of it all, later it was NKVD, then KGB and now FSB. But I guess this just shows your ignorance and shows us all better than anything else about the futile effort to have a meaningful discussion with you. There fore this is my final comment on this subject.
B. R. on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 12:45:34 (https://www.google.com.br/webhp?sourceid=navclient&hl=pt-BR&ie=UTF-8#sclient=psyab&hl=pt-BR&tbo=d&site=webhp&q=fernando+beira+mar+farc& oq=fernando+beira+mar+farc& gs_l=hp.12..0i30.2422.10656.0.18718.27.17.4.5.9.3.813.7471.2-2j4j3j2j4.15.00.01c.1.SYX7xU2Kmrs& pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&bvm=bv.1357700187,d.dmQ&fp=11fddd676710c4ec&biw=1016& bih=547)

35 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
(http://oglobo.globo.com/mundo/apoio-de-chavez-as-farc-incluia-uso-do-aparato-diplomaticoimigratorio-venezuelano-mostra-dossie-2771707) You have nerve to talk about gun running, well just check this out, the top is page after page after page implicating Fernand Beira Mar, one of Rios largest drug traficars with the Farc, and I can link up many more of the hookups with other drug gangs all over Brazil, then a link about Chaves and how he supports them, arms with Farc were traced back to Chaves, he helps them out, sends them arms and money And Brazil is being raped by the Farc , it is the largest crack cocaine user in the world because of these kind of hookups, make no mistake, Farc is not the only player, but its hookups with Chavez is an extremly devastating implication of Chavess real politics in the region.And I live this violence close up, it is very real Man , Sam, I dont care if you know the history of the KGB better than me, I know for a fact I saw and ex KGB agent in a casual interview on Brazil TV stating these factsare questioning that? You are wallowing in your hypocracy and you should take a bath and wash it offdont quit now, because I am just getting started
Legion ^I get the feeling youll be talking to your self.
on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 12:47:00
B. R. on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 12:54:42 I mean what do you have to say about that , Legion? Like you are telling me to bring it? I mean one question, Legion, what are you going to do about the Islamic Fundamentalist terroism that is just raking over the middle east , easily slaughering more muslims than ever they kill westerners? I wonder what is your solution? Take it up the rectum? I mean they did attack the USA, for basicly obtuse assymetric reasons, like American troops invited by Saudi leaders, or arming Israel, which as I have pointed out is pretty strange if you get down to ityeah, I bunch in all Islamic Fundamentalism that choses to uses its special brand of justice out in the world, followers of beleifs like that sob Sayyid I am talking about on the other thread..who started by assasinatin one of the great politions of Egypt and the world, Anwar Sadatwhat do you say about that? take if up the rectum again? I dont think I can trust you for a real solutionI dont think you are really aware enough of what really happens in the world, to judge what is the best way to deal with thatI mean you or Sam dont know squat about the information I just brought indo you?
B. R. on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 12:56:32 talk to myself? because I can bring in truth , the truth you are omitting, Legion? You can have your half truths and talk to each other, your bringing some weak arguments here
B. R. on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 13:00:23 I mean common , Leagion , fuking bring itwhat do you have to say about blowhard Chaves , with
36 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
his screaming about USA Imperialism, is arming Farc, supporting them, and sending suitcases of money to political leaders he supports , running for office in some countries in South America, I mean wtf , that is the DEFINITION OF IMPERIALISM!!! are you bsing me, Legion..and those guns that Farc is running is killing young brown black children more than Iraq fuking bring it , Legion.i mean , yeah, I dont mind talking to myself if I am bringing trugh
Kwamla @ B.R
on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 13:02:14
I see youve opted not to go along with my suggestion seconded by others on how to summarise your argument. A pity as it may have allowed others to see exactly what it is you are complaining about. Make no mistake B.R. What you keep re-presenting here is a rant about anti-Americanism bias! How many times are you going to make this one point over and over again? If you wish myself, any one else for that matter, to take you seriously then you will have to be a bit more analytical and substantive in your arguments. Just to take two examples: (1) Kwamla, I tell you what, when you can bring in youtubes about American foreign policies that can make more sence, maybe Ill make more sence, because, I just cant make any sence of a youtube history of the Congo that goes over the cold war period and just doesnt even mention that Che himself was on the scene to create a bloody revolution Why is the behaviour of Che Guevara (Cuba) equal/more relevant to the dire situation we see in the Congo today than the behaviour of Belgium, UK and America? (2) And, the real confusing data that was on the youtube of the 9/11 conspiricy you brought in as an argument against me.I mean, for real , Kwamla, that was so filled with blatent holes and falsities, with maybe some anomolies I can agree with, but, the over all arguments were extremly weak and confusing This may be your opinion B.R but if you are unable to break down those weak and confusing arguments substituting alternatives which make more sense to consider then you leave me nothing to challenge? This is really basic stuff B.R and I really shouldnt have to be explaining this to you at this level! I commended Sam for doing an excellent job of breaking down and trying to make sense of one of your last anti-American bias perceived rants and all you could offer in return was this:
37 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
How many times have I heard on this blog America is the only country that Sam, you lead the charge on that and you are a blatent liarhow many times have I corrected you that Brazil has quotas!!And you just stated that lie above..your arguments with me lose credibility with that logic , and I do support other arguments you make against racists, so its not like I got something against you, Sam . Maybe you and Kwamla and Legion just dont understand because you are too focused on you anti American bias that you just ignore facts that I bring indevastating facts, that cut to the core of your foundations B.R I am at the stage where I may no longer be able to take you seriously any more if you are going to continue making basic, non-factual opinionated statements like the above. If this is the only type and style of debate you can offer then I for one will not be wasting my time indulging you in this any more. Which would be a shame because you have demonstrated some capacity to go beyond this style before, e.g, the debates about Yurugu Dr Marimba Ani on the Reading Thucydides post: http://abagond.wordpress.com/2012/05/08/reading-thucydides/ Something seriously must have afflicted you B.R for you to dramatically change like this. Or perhaps you were always like this from the start?
Kwamla @ Bulanik
on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 18:56:25
Ive watched with interest youre exchanges with B.R over the past months. While I dont doubt your perceptions with regard to his sexism or how this might possibly translate generally in All commentators posts on this blog. I have wondered about your reactions to this at times. Youve presented far more compelling and informative writing in your posts than B.R could ever hope to achieve. And on a diverse array of subjects. So why would you allow yourself to be drawn into pointless personal disputes with him? The trivialities as youve called it.? Lets say youre right in your total assessments of his behaviour so far. If the guy is clearly unhinged and incapable of entertaining serious discussion (and with women in particular). Why would you respond to BRs challenges to draw you into debating at his better suited sexist, ad hominem level style? And then appear to take it personal? Or was this just attempting to have some fun on your part? Perhaps, this might also be something worthwhile considering
Kwamla Ok..Bulanik I will reflect on that
on Fri 11 Jan 2013 at 22:37:27
B. R. on Sat 12 Jan 2013 at 09:57:43 Kwamla , I did address your youtube very directly, I stated that the basic assumtions of a plane honing on on a floor in the world trade center to destroy evidence is ludicrissyou cant even look at a picture of the world trade center and figure out that floor , how can a jet in motion narrow in on that floorthe second plane was banking wildly and barely made its targetso your acuasation above is totaly wrongI also directly stated what was wrong with the youtube above
38 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
and yes, Che is as relevant as anyone as to the state of the Congo today, and given the misinformation that I mentioned directly,I dont trust everything that youtube is implyingwhy should I when they have such misinformationthe question to you is, why on earth would you not mention Che in the Congo if you are seriously looking at the history of it? So I reject your acuasation .the truth is, you are coming up short, Kwamla, by the way, throw in The Idaho Picker conspiricay theory. You bring in conspiricy , full of Swiss cheese holes, youtubes, that are flakey, I have told you exactly what I dont like about thembut it is you, Sam, Legion and Bulanik, who dont comment on the very valid evidence I just brought in about Chaves, running guns to the Farc, who are dealing in big time crack cocaine and arms to Brazilian drug gangs and raping and decimating the social fabric in Brazil (which by the way, Bulanik, Sam, you and Legion show very little knowledge on here at all, this is the largest country in the world with and African diasporic population outside of Nigeria, dont you think that is important in these discusions? It seems like Bulanik is knowledgable about things you pay attention to, but very ignorant of things I pay attention to ) I mean , Ive heard big time screaming on here about Guantanamo and Abu Grabi whatever the spelling, yet, the Farc, the people Moan Chumpski calls freedom fighters, drag about 700 prisoners in differant groups, through the slimey jungle, CHAINED TOGETHER in the most un humane conditions that make Guantanamo look like a picnic.why dont you and Sa, and Legion and Bulanik have anything to say about that.not a peepand , is it relevant to discusions on anti Americanim? Oh hades yes, with docus by Oliver Stone and some Doug guy from England with their shining tributes to Chavesthe blowhard is aiding and abetting Farc, serious Imperialism.but I dont here any mention on that.Ive talked about it beforeit seems like you avoid and cant comment on the things I bring in that chew away at the anti American bias that is flowing from the parties here Im speaking to So, excuse me if I dont agree with your analysis of where I am coming from.I am very consistant about where I am coming from, for 26 years, Ive been exposed to vile anti Americanism, and heard all the arguments, Im not some provincial corn shucker who thinks Obama is a socialist, Ive had to do the real research, about all sides, not the one sided , half truths you are backing in Sams history analysis abovemy gosh, every last thing he mentioned could be dissected and found that it is much bigger than just USA Imperialism.And that is one of my biggest points, there is a serious complexity in these world issues that cookie cutter depictions and one sided half truths dont do justice at alland, Im as surprised at your youtubes and stance as you are at minebecause I have gotten wonderful information from you, and I dont forget thatbut , intellectual shcolarly information doesnt really get at the truth,when talking about this anti American bias, intellectual information can be skewed and biased also Bulanik is so sure of this diologue between me and her because basicly she created and orchestrated it.As a matter of fact, its very apherant , she is full of herself. She starts a whispering campain (psst someone on here said bad things about me so I cant post on the first racist experiance), then, she acuses me of belittling her as a black woman, and sexist(?)when we are in discusions that have nothing to do with racism, when I challenge her arguments, which I find very challengable, she reverts to calling me racist white American oppressor. For the life of me, I have asked to have it pointed out where I belittled her as a black woman, but, she wont do it, she just fabricates this impresion of me and milks it on the whole blogI even pulled commentary to prove Im not stalking her ( gosh I love and miss roast turkey for thanksgiving), with the idea that when I do want to disagree with something weak she might say, I can without being
39 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
perceived as a stalkerI mean really its ridiculas that I have to do this at all ,since she is orchestatrating this false bs I mean seriously, look at her analysis above about this.I mean its a train wreck of muck racking hack lies
Legion Sorry to be off topic Abagond, Ill be brief.
on Sat 12 Jan 2013 at 19:42:30
For the life of me, I have asked to have it pointed out where I belittled her as a black woman, but, she wont do it Right, so stop now. This has been going on for some months. You cant force her or anyone else to say something you want them to say. Bulanik addressed this belittling issue in the prior Open Thread. She has said all she is going to say about it. This blog is not a court of law, YOU CAN NOT FORCE TESTIMONY OUT OF ANYONE HERE! This blog is a discussion forumTHE END. Humble advice from me to you B.R. : I believe Bulaniks words on some other thread to you were, leave me be. B.R., just let it go and keep from engaging Bulanik, it is probably the most reasonable course of action at this point.
B. R. on Sat 12 Jan 2013 at 20:42:31 Legion, I dont think you make the rules.First of all, I did pull out my commentary , and I played her false game of not addressing her,if you dont perceive these things, that isnt my problem. This is a public blog, we are here to express our opinions, no one can really tell anyone they cant disagree with their opinionsare you kidding me? And, where do you get off telling me to let go of bringing up my protest for being railroaded ? I am acused falsly of belittling her as a black woman, its orchestrated and blown up on here, then, I get called racist white opressor American , anytime I challenge some of her weak argumentsthat is why I pulled my comments, so I could come in for the issues that are worth it to talk about..like showing that the Taliban turn children into suicide bombers, and, they kill way more civilians than the USA, or calling her on trying to make out the followers of sob Qubt have some kind philisophical hook up with anti american white racismYes, then I am going to speak up To be frank with you, Legion, Ive seen you be quite rude to some girls on here if they said they liked Obama, where on this gawds earth do you get off coming in here to order me, when you indulge in that kind of behavior? Try it with me, Legion, because I know how to defend myself against your kind of insults while you are at it, why dont you answer some of the facts Ive brought in about South America and
40 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
the Chaves / Farc hook up..I mean you are so quick to just belittle me but you cant answer the facts I bring in and while you are at it, why dont you ask yourself, with your affinity for Moan Chumpsky, and you commentary on South American dictators, why did all the dictatorships go away in South America , with many leftist leaders elected , and, Fidel and Raul continue a vice grip on Cuba and North Korrea is under their permanant dictatorship?
sam on Sun 13 Jan 2013 at 00:55:40 What is this commie thing that certain type of people always bring up when they have nothing else left? It is like a reflex: The Commies!!! This has come out many times in different threads in this blog. And usually by people who begin by stating that they are not racists, that they are good persons (for various reasons), but after a while they start to scream and holler: communists! Is it something they learn at the early age or is it something in the culture or what? It is really interesting phenomena. I am not joking. Seriously, it is very strange.
Legion @B.R.
on Sun 13 Jan 2013 at 04:16:07
Because I am off topic and because I know our interchange here will quickly go awry if it carries on too long, this will be a last and again brief reply to you. I have not ordered you to do anything. Im aware this is not my blog and I dont make the rules. Recall: I said humble advice. Ive offered my humble advice, it is up to you to decide if it has merit or not. Ive been vociferous with anyone regardless of sex on the issue of Obama. I say vociferous, you might say rude.<-But this isnt about being rude or not being rude. It is about being sensible in light of an existing disagreement. Matari has asked me not to address him, I do not. Sharina and I recently began to speak again, prior to this, I left her alone, she left me alone. Peanut once called me a misogynist. Time passes and sometimes cooler heads emerge and perspectives change and ill feelings dissipate. Again, it may make the most sense to leave her be. But its up to you. Try it with me, Legion, because I know how to defend myself against your kind of insults Ha, ha, oh yes. You know how to defend yourself from my insults. I am the one hurling insults? It was you on the Child victims of drones thread who became so incensed over a non trivial and factual comment I made at Peanuts blog, that you asked me, more than once to go to another site so that you would be free to hurl language at me that would, you fear, get you banned at this site. But you need to defend against my insults rubbish! Okay, I have said my last to you on all of this. Do as you will.
41 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
B. R. on Sun 13 Jan 2013 at 11:04:27 You amaze me, Sam , seriosly, you sluff off 30 million Chinese, starved because of beaurocratic Marxist back to the feilds policies, and 20 million killed in the Cultural Revolution , as it happens all the time in China.that was in our lifetimedirectly because of Marxism..where is your head at? You sluff it off like its nothing.. Lets see, 50 million dead in our lifetime because of communism in China more than 20 ,millon dead because of Soviet communism 6 million dead by the Khemer Rouge in Cambodia that means that just from elimination, in only these 3 countries, 70 million people died because of communism, this isnt including the people killed by the bloody communist revolutions , or, North Korrea,Cuba etc Again , Sam, its listening to the drival people like you spout off about how the CIA was everywhere and everything was the fault of the USA, and you look back and only site what the USA was doing and not put it in context of what the whole story was I have to go back and correct your grade D bs I think its really telling, the truth is, I just brought in extremly contemporary facts about Hugo Chavez and his hook up with gun running and the Farc. I brought in the Al Jazeera article on how they turn kids into suicide bombers and page after page on google of their slaughter of civilians and facts that say they are responsible for 80 percent of civilian deaths And I get attacked, for something is wrong with me, and I get charactor assasinated , not one comment about the truth I have brought inand I have to correct people like your rehash of the cold war blaming the CIA and the USA for everything, by just pointing out the bare truth,and you think I have the problem about communism? Its obvisous Sam is obsessed by the CIA Sam, you need to re think your whole position because you are seriously brainwashed Legion, I never cursed you out over there, I invited you over to hear my opinion on Moan Chumpski and curse out anti Americans , I never said you personaly if I make any statement about Arab racism, I get carded about the Arab slave trade and belittled as stuff of white peopleif I want to make any statement on here at all, I have to defend the manipulative conniving trick bag Im being put intohey dont worry, as soon as these discusions are over, Ill go back into listening phase
B. R. on Sun 13 Jan 2013 at 12:04:00 Yes, down in Brazil, for 26 years , its been the most incredible education I could ask for to see how people can start brainwashing themselves about history and look to blame the USA as the boogy man , but not able to look in the mirror and take personal responsibility for their own inner conflicts they brought on themselves. Especialy the last 15 years or so, there is an especialy virulent strain of anti Americanism quafing from South America and Europe.Recognising the symptons from being next to it in Brazil, I can smell its putrid odor when I see it in plenty of other blogs from people across the Atlantic. Its like a dogmad , robotic , almost the same speech, as though they have been sitting in their coffee shops, deciding to make the USA the villain to bash to
42 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
not have to look at their own problemsand, you know, after Bush and Chenny and Iraq, I almost cant blame them, that was as blatent American Imperialism and the military industrial complex in action as you could find.great, lets scrutinise that and bash it and look at the dirtbut, to go back in time and take only USA foreign policies and find what is dirty about them and not look at the full reality about what was going on and what ideology had stood up to, that is another story and is bs The problem is, that they only get to know America from the media,the 6 or 7 corporations that are international and not just American.And, the truth is, it is the ceos on their own local perspective countries that choose which shows or reports of the corporate media they work for , go on the air.but, the people over there think it is AMERICA This virulent strain , affects black Americans also. The only images they really get about black Americans is from the media , and that is mostly thug rap images, and action films that might have black Americans as protaganists. And I can tell my black American colleagues (yeah, colleagues in the sence that we have American citizenship in common) that white Brazilians who are racist, dont seperate the black American struggle against white racism, they just lump black Americans all together with white Americans and hate on themespecialy if a black American comes to Brazil to try to help the Black Moviments in Brazil, Ive seen some really disgusting insults. Anti American Europeans have the same image stereotypes running in their heads and they dont seperate black Americans and their struggle with white American racism, they will lump black Americans into thug rap images and action American films and images coming from media corporate outlits. They really dont know black Americans at all, as a matter of fact, you can see on this blog how so many people claim to know about black Americans, when its obvious black Americans or white Americans dont really know about these individual back grounds, but they will claim to know all about black AmericansI mean we did see this, didnt we? Now the people on this blog who post from over the Atlantic, I consider they are concerned about black Americans struggle against white racismand they are very well read, some with living experiance in the USAI dont blame them at all about lumping in black Americans with white Americans and hating on them..but, lets take a look at the reality that seeps into this blog, because the truth is, these people from across the Atlantic have been brainwashed Legion and Dave Emmaneu (sp) both, in an argument with black Americans, stated something about their black American thinking, putting it as though it is a liability relating to their argument (Im not judging the argument here, Legion and Dave, Im stating you both demonstrated that you do think there is a black American way of thinking..that some of it you dont agree withnothing wrong with disagreeing, but, its notable that you classify there is a body of black American thinking. Look how many times we have heard the phrase on here only in America and its been blasted out of the water, or referance to the one drop rule..Ive lived in Chicago, New York, Los Angeles , and never saw any ruling based on the one drop rule Sam and Bulanik try to say that no Africans refer to themselves as black , which is a self description that black Americans like Malcolm X used to get away from the real racist words like the n word, colored, nigra etcand I proved, and other people also proved, with out a doubt that some Africans do use that word to self describeI mean of course they dont introduce them selves and say Im blackthat is ridiculas
43 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
And, Sam and Cornlia will try to say that the black American use of the word black, is really the white slave owners term and there for it is playing into them and the scientific white racism, but I brought in proof that black slaves , who they found letters from, actualy did refer to themselves as either African or black I mean the real underlying tone is that, in the end, even though we stand side by side against white racism, we, from across the Atlantic know better ( but from a position of concern..real concern , so im not saying they are bad for saying that, im saying they are misinformed and have made their own desicion about what is best) , and then you get into banshee screaming on the mixed race thread For me, a person who lives in a country that has some people in a real anti American bias, and seeing how they think, its clear to me that their is a brainwashed anti American bias coming from across the Atlantic, that when it even gets down to the nitty gritty, they classify black American way of thinking and they definitly have some advice for black Americans about how they should really think, if they can seperate the black American struggle with white racism at all, because for the real anti Americans, they just hate all Americans
B. R. on Sun 13 Jan 2013 at 12:14:47 (http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2012-09/06/c_131831678.htm) Abagond, this is a side not to you, because you know the protaginist I am going to talk about.I went on his blog , and argued with the professor about the Farc , and how they are decimating Brazil with crack cocaine and arms coming in, and the Farc had tie ins with Chaves In his typical blow hard mannor, he belittles my argument and sais it is exagerated and that it isnt meaningful and look at this recent article and how Brazil is now the biggest consumor of crack cocaine on the planet. I mean the professor could eaisly be on the side of these people im engaging with here, and he is an American living in Brazil almost as long as I have , so lets make it clear, Im not stating any position about Brazil that is just agreed with, its my opinion based on my researchbut its funny, people like him try to belittle me for really just stating the truth, and, here is the headline totaly confirming what I know to be true, and I have to get bashed on for itI really do hate to be so fuking right , sometimes
sam @BR:
on Sun 13 Jan 2013 at 19:06:28
Lets see, 50 million dead in our lifetime because of communism in China more than 20 ,millon dead because of Soviet communism 6 million dead by the Khemer Rouge in Cambodia that means that just from elimination, in only these 3 countries, 70 million people died because of communism, this isnt including the people killed by the bloody communist revolutions , or, North Korrea,Cuba etc
44 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM
It is North KoRea, not KoRRea. And thats for starters. I suggest some real history instead of anticommunist propaganda for you. But I must admit, I am not too hopeful with you. You are stuck in the 60s cold war mentality and think that way. So you are over the hill. And just like anyone stuck in some distant times long gone, you keep rambling like your distorted and funny stories would be relevant in this century. But I hope you would feel better soon.
Comments RSS
Blog at WordPress.com. The MistyLook Theme.
Follow
Follow Abagond
Powered by WordPress.com
45 of 45
7/22/2013 3:50 AM

It Was The Times!

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

It Was The Times!

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

It was the times!

It was the times!

It was the times! | Abagond

It was the times! | Abagond

It was the times! | Abagond

on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 21:35:41

It was the times! | Abagond

on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 23:20:19

It was the times! | Abagond

on Mon 22 Feb 2010 at 23:22:19

J I have to agree with you spot on no tautology this time he he No seriously

on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 00:27:17

It was the times! | Abagond

Jalylah Abraham Lincoln was black.

on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:03:58

It was the times! | Abagond

Eurasian Sensation @ alwaysright101: spot on.

on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:33:03

It was the times! | Abagond

on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 01:37:00

on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 02:34:45

It was the times! | Abagond

on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 19:47:08

It was the times! | Abagond

Eurasian Sensation @ Jalylah:

on Tue 23 Feb 2010 at 23:17:11

no_slappz jeri, you wrote:

on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 01:30:50

It was the times! | Abagond

no_slappz eurasian sensation, you wrote:

on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 01:51:07

It was the times! | Abagond

on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 05:35:59

It was the times! | Abagond

That will be all from me to you.

no_slappz eurasian sensation, you wrote:

on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 16:00:07

It was the times! | Abagond

It was the times! | Abagond

no_slappz abagond, you wrote:

on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 16:15:08

abagond Wow. This is so sad seeing grown men lie to themselves.

on Wed 24 Feb 2010 at 17:15:39

It was the times! | Abagond

Uncle Milton To Jalylah:

on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 07:16:26

Eurasian Sensation @ Uncle Milton:

on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 08:43:03

It was the times! | Abagond

Uncle Milton To Eurasian Sensation:

on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 05:12:53

on Fri 9 Apr 2010 at 16:54:14

It was the times! | Abagond

Black Slaveowners: Free Black Slave Masters in South Carolina, 1790-1860

J I am slightly confused here, was not the issue

on Fri 9 Apr 2010 at 17:14:48

It was the times! | Abagond

J Having gone through the link, we see:

on Fri 9 Apr 2010 at 17:25:14

It was the times! | Abagond

The Known World

Kiernan820 J, I think our posts crossed through the ether.

on Fri 9 Apr 2010 at 17:43:25