Skip to main content

[QUOTE]Originally posted by sergeant:
Whatzgoin:

Actually, when one says 'built' the nation, they aren't speaking about people who dig holes or pick cotton, or empty latrines. Anyone can do those things anywhere.

The term 'built' is reserved for those who planned, those who financed, those who risked, and those who had the vision to 'design' the structures, institutions, and foundations of the nation. The 'founders' are who the term is commonly applied to.

In the case of America, those were almost exclusively ALL white christian males with european ancestry. Lets not dispute the indisputable here.
QUOTE]

That's a very egocentric view of history, my friend.

Whites manipulated, killed, enslaved, oppressed and exploited a lot of people to steal this land and turn it into what it is today. I'll give you credit, you were (and continue to be) very efficient at such things. And what is even better, you made yourselves believe that you were right and just in your methods, (and continue to do), even if it contradicts the very instrument that you base your principles and your foundation on (the Bible). The most amazing thing (in my mind) is the continued psychological dominance you continue to exhibit over those groups you have exploited, killed, manipulated, enslaved, and oppressed on your rise to power. If I could be an impartial observer, and if I didn't have any shred of self-esteem, morality or a true religious conscious, I could almost admire you for your work.


Whether your rise to dominance in both the domestic front and the modern global society is a sign of greatness or unsurpassed evil depends on whose lens you are looking through.
sgt posted,

"dollars spent"
Doesn't sound like a strength either, in fact sounds like a lot more work in order to make the same amount of dollars.


*sgt, if you're really thinking that overlooking ethnic markets, businesses and suppliers would result in the same profits, then you are "shell shocked" and really have been indoctrinated into a very narrow mindset. You seem to have a god-like view of white people in terms of what you give credit for and how you give it. Please go and read diversityinc.com and gather facts before you go into YOUR take on reality.
quote:
Oh, so I see that this is yet another example of 'diversity' NOT being a strength, but quite the contrary.

Additionally, the serbs, croats and russians, according to you, were also not so enamored by with any sense of 'diversity' being their strength either. Agreed.

Interesting.

Sgt. you're a hopeless freakin' FLAKE!!

MBM directly answered your ridiculously DUMB question then you tried to spin it as proof of your ill-contrived premise.
quote:
Originally posted by sergeant:

Put it this way, in a nation with no diversity, would we see the racial strife and friction we see here?

Ah... DUMBASS!!! A nation with NO (racial) diversity can't possibly have "racial strife" because they by your definition only have ONE race.

Not only does that make you look STUPID & DUMB but it also disproves you homogenous model as one that is "strong(er)"... Obviously, there is strife and friction in so-called homogenous countries. Obviously you know very little about Chinese politics for you to promote their society as a virtual Utopia free from friction and factions.

L o R d Y !! Eek
*Sigh*

41 percent of CEO's surveyed in 1995 said affirmative action actually improved corporate productivity (Faye J. Crosby and Sharon D. Hertzberger "For Affirmative Action" in Affirmative Action: Pros and Cons of Policy and Practice, edited by R.J. Simon, P. 55)

An analysis of 100 of Chicago's largest firms over a 13-year period found no statistically significant relationship between the firm's share of minority workers and their profit margins or returns on equity (Liz McMillen "Policies Said To Help Companies Hire Qualified Workers At No Extra Cost" Chronicles of Higher Education 11/17/95, p. A7)

According to a study that compared the market performance of the 100 firms with the best and worst records of hiring and promoting women and minorities, the former averaged an 18 percent return on investments, whereas the latter's returns were below 8 percent (U.S. Department of Labor, OFCCP Glass Ceiling Commission 1995, pp. 14, 61)
How can you FOUND a country that already has inhabitants? Christian white males came here? I thought England let loose her criminaly insane to come here and go to Austrailia to inflict havoc upon the Aboriginines there. What is a Christian white male anyway? A fantasy in my book. No one on this earth that can do sooo much killing and hating of other people just because they don't look like them or act in the manner they do can call themselves CHRISTIANS. SATAN maybe.

[This message was edited by Norland on September 17, 2003 at 03:02 PM.]


[This message was edited by Norland on September 18, 2003 at 03:38 AM.]
And now the riff-raff saunters in to protect their 'mindsets' by offering only personal insults. Fear not my friends, you are conversing with a brother, not the white man that you hate so much. But I'm going to tell it like it is.

But in uncovering historical reality, it is truly insane to suggest that all white people did was come here to kill other folks or oppress other folks, etc, thats an ignorant view of history. Didn't happen that way at all. When you make statements whatsit such as:

"Whites manipulated, killed, enslaved, oppressed and exploited a lot of people to steal this land and turn it into what it is today"

You are speaking of pretty much every people in every region on the planet, not just those who migrated into the vastness of the western hemisphere.

Fact is there is not a region on this planet where the 'original' inhabitants of any given region have not been removed at some time, either by other peoples or nature itself. Africa is full of people migrations as well as historical wars and bloodshed, massacres and injustice, and the same goes for Asia and Europe.

All regions throughout history have had killing and war, slavery and liberation, all regions throughout history have had oppression and exploitation. There is nothing 'worse' or 'different' about the migration to North America.

Yet, all regions have NOT turned these regions into regions anywhere as benevolent as America has become today. THAT is primarily what set this nation apart from all others throughout history.

Now, those 'native peoples' you speak of did not originate here either, and did their share of killing and robbing and raping of europeans as well. In addition, recent archeological discoveries in Brazil demonstrate an old 'african' settlement, perhaps 12000 years old, older than any previously thought to exist there. And the conclusions thus far are that they disappeared entirely due to a new 'immigrant' to the region at that time, the so-called 'native' americans, who fought with, competed with, and eventually annihilated these first 'black' settlers in the Americas. Yet, I don't hear anyone say that native americans are all bloodthirsty or that they acted worse than anyone else. Yet, because its 'whites' from europe who settled the americas, 'they' somehow are worse than all other peoples on the planet? Thats foolishness if one truly wants to portray a historical perspective. Thats little more than prejudice, ignorance, and hate talking, not reality.

So, lets not get all uppidity when we read of past wars or past oppression, or anything within the historical record. It was an amazing thing for the 'old' world to come into contact with the vast American continents. But there is hardly anything 'unusual' or un-typical about how the land got settled, why people migrate, and how friction between cultures occurs.

I know its 'popular' to view the migration to america as somehow being 'worse' than any other, but thats ignorance of history, not reality. There has been far worse inhumanity than anything that occurred in North America.

Stop the comic book recitations of history, and realize that 'human' history is full of both the good and bad, on every continent, and for every people who have ever been on earth. Feel lucky to have not been born into such times, and feel lucky to be where you are, cause it was just luck my friends. It could ALWAYS be a lot worse. Just visit North Africa TODAY if you don't believe me.
quote:
Fear not my friends, you are conversing with a brother, not the white man that you hate so much. But I'm going to tell it like it is.


What difference does it make? Brother or Other??

You still get NO RESPECT!!

You speak from your perspective. Members here speak from theirs. PERIOD!! And you get NO RESPECT!! Cause you can't stand on your words. PERIOD!!

So what's the use with taking your adversarial approach to this site?? If you want to tell it like it is, then just tell it. Nobody's (and I sure ain't) concerned about what you think of their opinion... unless all you want to do is argue anyway. That's cool.

Just present whatever info. you want, support it, and go on about you business.
Man, this board is going to make me lose my job winkgrin

I apologize for assuming that you were white(?). I read some of the other posts and assumed you were a representative of that other site that seems to agitate people so much.

I don't hate white people at all. However, don't take my posts to mean I cannot debate facts without letting my emotions override my logic. Let's go.

What you say about every region being taken over or invaded is true. I alluded to that fact earlier. But my point was, yes, everybody did similar things, but nobody throughout history did what the first Americans did. It is unprecedented.

The whites that settled here nearly wiped the Native population off the face of the earth. Even in South and Central America, and Australia, and Africa there exists large pockets of native people still on their original lands, albeit mainly in settlements or forests or other "incontinent" places. The only place that was more efficient would be the islands inhabited by the Europeans. Now these colonialists killed ALL the natives, but the population they faced paled in comparison to the Native American population of the land that would become the United States.

The whites that "settled" America enslaved and forever negatively affected the growth of another continent (Africa), and forever did irrefutable and permanent harm to the pockets of Africans that they brought to toil and breed and exploit (African Americans). Unlike previous forms of slavery, there was no sense of assimilation or spoils of war. The intent was to use humans as chattel, to work them like animals, to breed them like animals, and to let them die like animals. Never in the history of the world had there been anything like the plantation chattel slavery. Not to mention the millions that died on the way to this "new" land. No other event has surpassed the Middle Passage. Not the Holocaust. Not World War I or II.

And lets' look later to the influence America had in other lands when they were established. Latin America. Africa. The Middle East. The only other movements that can compare to what the whites "achieved" in this land would be the Roman Empire and the Ottoman Empire. And these movements mainly assimilated other cultures into theirs, or with the Ottomans, simply took over and allowed the natives to mostly maintain their own cultures.

But like I said earlier, if I could be an impartial observer, I would have to marvel at how they came to be the most powerful entity this planet has ever known. More than that, the psychological power that they command over the world is remarkable. But where you mess up is bringing Christianity into the mix, because when you do, by the standards that they choose, they are certainly magnificent sinners. I am not a scolar, but I don't think you can legitimately condone the actions that made and continue to make this country what it is.

I could be wrong.
"but nobody throughout history did what the first Americans did. It is unprecedented."

You seem like a nice man, but your statement is UTTER nonsense. Why was the great wall of china built, for example? That is but one of millions of examples of what people have done to people throughout human existance.

And get this, the 'monguls' of northern asia, the very same people some of whom later migrated into North America, whom we now call 'native americans', are you familiar with the history of the monguls? Some of the most barbaric and wide-reaching atrocities known to man were committed by these soon to be 'natives' of america, and still this was not unprecedented.

Come now, the history of the region today known as the Baltics alone makes North american history look tame in comparison, not to mention africa and asia.

"The whites that settled here nearly wiped the Native population off the face of the earth."

There are plenty of native americans still living on their own lands today. The 4 corners region of the US is living proof of that. The majority of deaths were caused by land developement, cultural clashes, and common biological diseases, not an overt attempt by every european to destroy native people.

One of the fatal flaws of native american cultures was the lack of a concept of 'land ownership'. Native americans could not preceive that land could be 'owned' by man. This was a huge factor in their inability to maintain lands and resources. Common settlers did not feel or recognize, in many cases, that they were 'taking' anything from anyone, since the natives themselves did not have this concept that they 'owned' any of it. This 'cultural', not militaristic, clash was bound to unseat either one group of the other.

In fact, unlike any other region or people in the world, 'land reservations' were set aside for the losing participants of the Indian Wars, and even given tribal sovereignty, something unheard of anywhere else in history to my knowledge. This was an effort to 'preserve' the native people. Where else have you seen that occur?

No, it was not perfect, but not even close to being 'worst'.

At the time of transatlantic slavery, africa was no gem to humanity. African tribal chieftans routinely sold off victims in their wars for conquest as slaves, and had done so for at least a thousand years, a practice only continued by foreign interests later, not devised. Sadly, some are STIll selling off slaves in Africa even TODAY. The romantic notions of Africa 'if it had only been' are more romanticism than fact. Egypt had come and gone by then, arabs reigned over much the north. African tribal societies warred with each other, took slaves, and did both evil and good, just like any other people.

"Never in the history of the world had there been anything like the plantation chattel slavery"

With the exception of the technology of 'ships', this is nonsense. Answer this question: Is it better to be 'property', or is it better to be 'food' for lions, like the christians and slaves of Rome routinely were.

Fact of the matter is that as 'property', slaves were protected since they 'cost' the owners. Try being a slave to the Romans, or in ancient China, or a slavic slave in North Africa, where you were often captured or received for free, and fed to lions or just killed when it suited your captors. Seriously, to say nothing like that ever happened is to not know history. FAR worse has happened many many times.

"And these movements mainly assimilated other cultures into theirs, or with the Ottomans, simply took over and allowed the natives to mostly maintain their own cultures."

Yeah, I'm sure everyone in ancient history practiced 'political correctness', where they respected the cultures of the slaves and victims of their atrocities and conquests whom they battered and abused. Come now, who we kidding here. Do you see how absurd that point of view is?

To speak of Romans for example, or ancient asian dynastys, as assimulating people, when they worked them to death and subjected them to far worse fates and lives than anything experienced by our ancestors, is naive. Travel was a much different thing in times past. Cultures may have been permitted to retain themselves somewhat, but only because of 'distance', not respect or a notion of assimulating them. Ask the jews how much Rome wanted to assimulate them.

"they are certainly magnificent sinners"

And that is were many of us go wrong. To say that ALL the immigrants were sinners is wholly unfounded. Everyone knows that 'bad' news travels further than 'good' news. But you and I are testiment that not ALL people of any race are ALL bad. We'd still be shackled if that were so. Wake up.

You see, I don't have to 'condone' anything that has occurred in history whatzgoin, since I wasn't there and its already be done by people other than anyone I know. Everyone knows history is full of tragedy as well as greatness. I neither must approve or disapprove of it, I simply have to KNOW it as accurately as possible.

I'm sorry, but American history is FAR from the worst history that has existed, that notion is a manifestation of recent political ideology and trends, since its human nature to want to favor the underdog. But world history prior to the settlement of the western hemisphere contains events and times that make the european migration to the west look like a visit from an ice cream truck. Thats just reality.

I respect your views, we may disagree on this, theres nothing wrong with that. Thanks.

[This message was edited by sergeant on September 18, 2003 at 09:22 AM.]
quote:
I'm sorry, but American history is FAR from the worst history that has existed, that notion is a manifestation of recent political ideology and trends, since its human nature to want to favor the underdog.

There's also a human phenomenon for Riding The Bandwagon!! Everybody Loves A Winner!! Ever heard of that?

You can't be honest about hardly anything you have to say. There's nothing recent in any "political ideology" much less yours.

Further, I don't think WHATZ said that "American history" is the "worst history". He qualified it, I do believe - aka talked about a particular aspect. One part and not the whole. See the difference??

So in your usual fashion you have went about trying to distort what it is that others have said hoping that it will strengthen your position. It still hasn't worked.
quote:
And that is were many of us go wrong. To say that ALL the immigrants were sinners is wholly unfounded. Everyone knows that 'bad' news travels further than 'good' news. But you and I are testiment that not ALL people of any race are ALL bad. We'd still be shackled if that were so. Wake up.


How do you know that??

Mere speculation on your part. I guess Black people never did anything in resistance??

Well, if that were so, we would certainly still live under segregation (unless you can document a movement of "good" White people that were the vanguards against segregation... I don't think you can.)

WAKE UP!

Gullible Sarge!
Sgt.

You have NO case!

As usual you try to change the topic. "We'd still be in shackles..." Isn't that what YOU said?? Wasn't that a direct assertion about BLACK PEOPLE IN AMERICA??

Now why are you talking about North and Central Africa without context...?

Weasel as you may. You are known from this day as a WEASEL at play.

Weasel on... My Brother! fro

[This message was edited by Nmaginate on September 18, 2003 at 09:53 AM.]
Sergent,

If you REALLY believe everything you wrote, all I can muster is WOW.

I don't even know where or how to start a post on what I just read. I wish you could see my face right now.

I respect the fact that you calmly and respectfully voiced your opinions, and I will come back to this later and dissect what you wrote while showing the same respect, but . . .

WOW


It's not often someone can shock me into silence.
The Framers or "Founding Fathers" established the country's laws, and developed the executive, judicial, and representative branches of government in this country...

However, the SLAVES built the country, not the Founding Fathers. If they didn't built it, there wouldn't be a reason for them to be brought here, which means that the white American settlers wouldn't have needed slaves in the first place.
Sergeant,

If you truly want honest dialogue, you need to be honest and stop telling us you are a "brother" I went back and read your posts, and your conservative style of egocentrism is screaming white male. Don't mean to be stereotypical, but you don't attempt to hide it. When you said you were a brother, it really threw me from a loop. It is insulting to the intelligence of the black community to expect that every black person would exhibit the same behaviors and hold the same opinion on things, but your comments aren't even on the radar.

My response is long, because I will break down your paragraphs one by one: I am slowly learning from other dialogues on this board that this best way to communicate ideas, because people will focus on one sentence or statement and forget everything else you wrote around it or the just of your entire argument.
************************************************************************
"but nobody throughout history did what the first Americans did. It is unprecedented."

You seem like a nice man, but your statement is UTTER nonsense. Why was the great wall of china built, for example? That is but one of millions of examples of what people have done to people throughout human existance.

And get this, the 'monguls' of northern asia, the very same people some of whom later migrated into North America, whom we now call 'native americans', are you familiar with the history of the monguls? Some of the most barbaric and wide-reaching atrocities known to man were committed by these soon to be 'natives' of america, and still this was not unprecedented.

Come now, the history of the region today known as the Baltics alone makes North american history look tame in comparison, not to mention africa and asia.
**********************************************************************
I am not talking so much physically, because you are correct when you say that there are far greater examples of human beings using the most horrific means possible in killing other human beings. What I refer to is the psychological affects that
but nobody throughout history did what the first Americans did. It is "unprecedented." There had never in the history of the world been a system like chattel slavery. In all other forms of slavery, there was some degree of humanity (humanity is probably not the best word for it but I can think of no other) where the slaves had some statue. In chattel slavery, slaves had NO status. Hell, they were thought of as property rather than as people.
**********************************************************************
"The whites that settled here nearly wiped the Native population off the face of the earth."

There are plenty of native americans still living on their own lands today. The 4 corners region of the US is living proof of that. The majority of deaths were caused by land developement, cultural clashes, and common biological diseases, not an overt attempt by every european to destroy native people.

One of the fatal flaws of native american cultures was the lack of a concept of 'land ownership'. Native americans could not preceive that land could be 'owned' by man. This was a huge factor in their inability to maintain lands and resources. Common settlers did not feel or recognize, in many cases, that they were 'taking' anything from anyone, since the natives themselves did not have this concept that they 'owned' any of it. This 'cultural', not militaristic, clash was bound to unseat either one group of the other.

In fact, unlike any other region or people in the world, 'land reservations' were set aside for the losing participants of the Indian Wars, and even given tribal sovereignty, something unheard of anywhere else in history to my knowledge. This was an effort to 'preserve' the native people. Where else have you seen that occur?

**********************************************************************
It seemed to be working for them until the "first" Americans came and told them it was all wrong. All the land development, cultural clashes, and certainly those biological diseases that you don't seem to hold a great deal of concern about were for the most part the agenda and not the consequences of curious and innocent settlers (WOW. Man, I wish I could go around with this attitude and not have any sort of consequences for it). If you don't believe me, see Andrew Jackson bio, various accounts of Anglo-Indian wars, accounts of using smallpox and alcoholism as a weapon, Trail of Tears.
No, it was not perfect, but not even close to being 'worst'.
*********************************************************************

At the time of transatlantic slavery, africa was no gem to humanity. African tribal chieftans routinely sold off victims in their wars for conquest as slaves, and had done so for at least a thousand years, a practice only continued by foreign interests later, not devised. Sadly, some are STIll selling off slaves in Africa even TODAY. The romantic notions of Africa 'if it had only been' are more romanticism than fact. Egypt had come and gone by then, arabs reigned over much the north. African tribal societies warred with each other, took slaves, and did both evil and good, just like any other people.
**********************************************************************
Believe me, I have no romantic notions of Africa. I agree with what you are saying, but are you implying that it was your ancestor's duty to go in and civilize the African, and if you kill, subjugate and forever ruin the progress of the continent and it's people? As I said before, if you are simply looking at it as strong vs. the weak, then your argument holds more water. But you are the one who threw in Christianity in your earlier thread, so do your actions in the "dark continent" do justice to your Christian foundation? Wait, I think you did in fact use the guise of Christianity for that and the justification of the slave trade, so never mind.
***********************************************************************
"Never in the history of the world had there been anything like the plantation chattel slavery"

With the exception of the technology of 'ships', this is nonsense. Answer this question: Is it better to be 'property', or is it better to be 'food' for lions, like the Christians and slaves of Rome routinely were.
***********************************************************************
Fact of the matter is that as 'property', slaves were protected since they 'cost' the owners. Try being a slave to the Romans, or in ancient China, or a slavic slave in North Africa, where you were often captured or received for free, and fed to lions or just killed when it suited your captors. Seriously, to say nothing like that ever happened is to not know history. FAR worse has happened many many times.
************************************************************************
There is no such thing is benign slavery. I will be perfectly honest with you. You could have fed me the best food, gave me the best education, and treated me like a son instead of your property, but the first chance I got, I would have killed you, your wife, your children, and anybody else who hindered me from my freedom. Though they are suffering heavily for it now, I respect the hell out of the Haitians (and others) for the way they took their freedom. To me, no material possession in this world is as valuable as a person's freedom and dignity.
***********************************************************************
"And these movements mainly assimilated other cultures into theirs, or with the Ottomans, simply took over and allowed the natives to mostly maintain their own cultures."

Yeah, I'm sure everyone in ancient history practiced 'political correctness', where they respected the cultures of the slaves and victims of their atrocities and conquests whom they battered and abused. Come now, who we kidding here. Do you see how absurd that point of view is?

To speak of Romans for example, or ancient asian dynastys, as assimulating people, when they worked them to death and subjected them to far worse fates and lives than anything experienced by our ancestors, is naive. Travel was a much different thing in times past. Cultures may have been permitted to retain themselves somewhat, but only because of 'distance', not respect or a notion of assimulating them. Ask the jews how much Rome wanted to assimulate them.
************************************************************************
Oh, don't make the mistake that I believe that the Ottomans just let everybody do their thing. My point was that the Ottomans left the cultures they took over largely intact when the came in. Hell, the Ottomans became "Muslims" after THEY invading the Arab lands. I am speaking from the experience of an African that was forced to come to America by your ancestors. You purposely DESTROYED almost every semblance of an African identity to the point where exactly in Africa I came from or what Africans I originated from. In L.A. there are still blacks that can speak the languages of their African ancestors. Not that I am giving credence to that myth that the Spaniards brand of slavery and racism, because the way they screwed with blacks minds down there is crazy too.
************************************************************************
"they are certainly magnificent sinners"

And that is were many of us go wrong. To say that ALL the immigrants were sinners is wholly unfounded. Everyone knows that 'bad' news travels further than 'good' news. But you and I are testiment that not ALL people of any race are ALL bad. We'd still be shackled if that were so. Wake up.

You see, I don't have to 'condone' anything that has occurred in history whatzgoin, since I wasn't there and its already be done by people other than anyone I know. Everyone knows history is full of tragedy as well as greatness. I neither must approve or disapprove of it, I simply have to KNOW it as accurately as possible.

I'm sorry, but American history is FAR from the worst history that has existed, that notion is a manifestation of recent political ideology and trends, since its human nature to want to favor the underdog. But world history prior to the settlement of the western hemisphere contains events and times that make the european migration to the west look like a visit from an ice cream truck. Thats just reality.

I respect your views, we may disagree on this, theres nothing wrong with that. Thanks.
I don't know if that was my quote, but I will address it anyway. I will never say that all people from one race are evil or another are all saints. However, I will say that, in my opinion, every one of those who willingly benefited from the disenfranchisement of another people are indeed sinners, and in the case of the slave owners and their families, the settlers who willfully and maliciously killed the Indian and stole his land, and the 50's Southerner who refused the rights of people who simply were different from them, along with those who could have made a difference and did nothing are indeed "magnificent sinners." That is, if you believe what's in your Bible, whichever version and interpretation you choose to use.

It is easy for those who are on top to condone or be indifferent to the actions taken to get you there. You didn't commit any of these crimes I write about, but you and your people are most certainly benefiting from them, whether, and I and my people are still suffering from them you see it (or choose to admit it) or not. Should I hate you for it? No. Do I have the right to be a little bitter about it? Absolutely, as long as I don't let that bitterness inhibit me from reaching my full potential or use that bitterness as a crutch instead of a boost.

The rise of America is a great example of the human spirit or the epitome of hypocrisy. It depends on whose lens you are looking through.

Great dialogue you got going here though.
.

[This message was edited by whatzgoingon on September 19, 2003 at 03:55 PM.]

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×