"Blacks ought to be thankful for slavery; otherwise, they'd be back in Africa."

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Guynemer


But it's true.

Were it not for slavery, many blacks likely would not be America.

Were it not for the Holocaust, Jews likely wouldn't have Israel.

So, since several people have said that blacks are better off because of slavery, I would just like them to admit that they also think that Jews are better off because of the Holocaust.

The creation of the israeli state was not solely because of the holocaust, but if it was it would be fair to say that the creation of Israel was an unintended positive outcome, just as slavery has had unintended positive outcomes for blacks.

[David Floyd]

To make a blanket condemnation of America's homeless as "lazy" and "squandering opportunities" is one of the more crass and ignorant comments I've read today. You're better than that.

Sorry, I just believe that the vast majority of poverty in the US is due to laziness and missed opportunities, and government welfare programs. I imagine that the government ****ing people by sending them to Vietnam plays a role as well.
So it's both their own fault and the government's fault when it comes down to it.

Actually, I'm sorry. That's a cheap shot. But David, you really do turn into a hemorrhoidal a**hole when the topic of conversation comes anywhere near race. You're usually more intelligent than that.

What does poverty have to do with race?
Unless you are stereotyping minorities as poverty-stricken the two are unrelated.

[Guynemer]

Here you go, Sparky.

Excuse me Guynemer, but I find this discussion dificult to take seriously.

I see no problem in black people billing the decendants of slave owners for the work those slaves did if the slave owners can counter sue for transportation charges from Africa, victuals, and housing.

Why?

Because the decendants of slaves have something here in America that their relatives in Africa lack.

Oportunity.

Also, most of the slaves were owned by blacks before being sold to slavers. The blacks were tribal of course, and would sell POWs in the coastal slave markets, run by blacks, for money to finance their continued wars. Before slavery started these poor unfortunate POWs were commonly tortured to death. SO, instead of sueing people who weren't even alive at that time, or companies that were involved in the slave trade whose owners and stockholders weren't alive at that time, maybe the blacks ought to try to obtain money in the land of oportunity the old fashioned way, earn it. Just like the English settlers, the Poles, Jews, Germans and Irish. All these groups had a fight to begin with. Perhaps not against slavery, but at first against an undeveloped land, later against extreme poverty and racism, such as the Irish.

My mother, decended from German imigrants, suffered great hardships growing up in poor, dirty,overcrowded cities. Her people did flee europe because of religious persicution. Am I to sue the governments of europe for the religious intolerance of the 1600s?

Feel better now?

So the Jews now have the opportunity for self-government. Thank goodness for the Holocaust.

At the very least, admit that your "joke" was disgusting. (I'm also wondering how it can count as a joke if you still go on to seriously justify it.)

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Caligastia


The creation of the israeli state was not solely because of the holocaust, but if it was it would be fair to say that the creation of Israel was an unintended positive outcome, just as slavery has had unintended positive outcomes for blacks.

Okay. Fine. This is all I'm looking for. I don't agree with your position at all, but at least you've balls enough to come out and say this. Bully for you.

[David Floyd]

the creation of Israel was an unintended positive outcome

Not for anyone but Jews and arms manufacturers - but I digress

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by David Floyd
What does poverty have to do with race?
Unless you are stereotyping minorities as poverty-stricken the two are unrelated.

With all due respect, Mr. Floyd, the discussion was about race AND poverty.

And, if it makes you happy, you also turn into a jackass when discussing poverty. So, there ya go.

[David Floyd]

Much better

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Much better

I'm glad we came to this amicable agreement, jackass.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Bugs ****ing Bunny
David.....

To make a blanket condemnation of America's homeless as "lazy" and "squandering opportunities" is one of the more crass and ignorant comments I've read today. You're better than that.

Many of americas homeless are people who are mentally ill or have drug and alcohol problems, but I dont see what this has to do with the topic of this thread...

[Drake Tungsten]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This analogy doesn't hold water

Originally posted by Guynemer
Define "significant source of African immigration in the pre-1865 period that did not involve the slave trade." What would make it "significant"? After surfing around for a while, I found a site that listed African immigrants pre-Civil War at somewhere around 2,000... it was by decade, so I didn't add it up, and I thought I could find a better website. Sadly, no. I can try to dig it up again, but it may take a while.

Regardless, just as Israel can not be solely attributed to the Holocaust, blacks in American can not be solely attributed to slavery. The analogy seems apt to me.

Ok, I'm going to try to explain why I think your analogy is flawed.

I think the argument for why slavery did have some unintended positive effects can be simplified down to this statement.

Slavery is the reason why the descendents of slaves are in America-> America is a much better place to live than Africa-> Therefore, slavery did have some positive effects

Note that this only pertains to the descendants of slaves, who are the folks for whom reparations are being considered. Not every black in America is included in this.

Now, a similar statement for your Holocaust analogy would look something like this.

The Holocaust is the reason why Israel exists-> Israel is a better place to live than Europe-> The Holocaust did have some positive effects

In order for this to work, we'll only count the Jews who fled Europe after the Holocaust and will ignore all the Jews who arrived in Israel before the war or who came from places other than Europe. However, even when you limit the statement to those Jews whose presence in Israel is most dependent on the Holocaust, you still don't have a workable argument. This is for two reasons.

1. As I brought up, the Holocaust is not the reason that Israel exists. It definitely played a role in speeding up the creation of a Jewish state, but it is quite possible that Israel would've been formed even if the Holocaust had never happened.

2. As Loinburger brought up, there is no reason to believe that the Jews are any better off in Israel than they would've been if they had stayed in Europe. Living conditions in the two places are comparable and Israel is certainly not a safe place to be right now.

Compare these problems with the statement about slavery. First, we know that slaves and their descendents are in America because of the slave trade (duh). Second, it is almost guaranteed that the conditions descendents of slaves experience in America are superior to those they would be experiencing if their families had remained in Africa. I know that you will claim that this is speculation and you would be right. However, it is well supported speculation given the horrendous conditions in Africa these days.

Basically what you get from this whole mess is one statement that makes some logical sense, whether you agree with it or not, and a second statement that really doesn't make sense. The only real connection between the slavery statement and the Holocaust statement is that slavery and the Holocaust were both really bad things. That's certainly not enough to base a working analogy off of, at least in my opinion.

Damn that was long. I hope it all made sense.

[MrFun]

I cannot believe how far this thread has degenerated.

When I thanked people with whom I disagree with in another thread, I was NOT thanking those who provide illogical over-generalizations that ignore historical factors. Much like David has been doing here.

You cannot ignore the Muslim civilizations that existed in Africa before Europe conquered Africa after 1870.

Had those Muslim states been able to continue their independent development, blacks in America might have been better OR worse off -- we cannot know for certain, since that is speculation.

I do not see any rationale in the argument that blacks today are better off in United States than African states BECAUSE OF slavery.

And stop blaming problems that people have, that are a result of societal and governmental flaws.

[Lancer]

The quote you used was my attempt to show you WHY I found the discussion difficult to take seriously. The decendants of blacks sueing people or companies today is just absurd to me. It is perhaps the end result of our litigious society. Can I sue because some european country chased out my mother's ancesters on religious grounds? The whole this is REDICULOUS. I attempted to show how rediculous using the bit you qouted. So you see, it was out of context.

Regarding black people today being better off for being in the US, yes I believe that. Certainly the slaves themselves were only better off if you consider the horrible alternative that they faced.
A POW that wasn't sold as a slave would be tortured to death. Is he better off being sold as a slave? Put yourself in his place Guynemer. Sure, living as a slave would be very bad, but wouldn't it be better than being tortured to death? I'm not saying slavery was right, it was horrible no doubt. No human should own another. However, in this case the individual was better off, if he was a POW, as so many were.

The blacks today have a shot at living in a country other than a third world deathtrap. Sure, if a kid decides to be a LA gang banger maybe he has less chance at life, but at least he had a choice. What shot do you have if you are stuck in Africa? Consider the growing number of middle class blacks in the US, raising thier families in peace and prosperity. Find a comperable group in Africa...

Slavery was miserable, but are the decendants of slavery better off?

Well, would you rather live in the US or the third world?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Guynemer


Okay. Fine. This is all I'm looking for. I don't agree with your position at all, but at least you've balls enough to come out and say this. Bully for you.

What is it about that statement that you disagree with?

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Lancer
Slavery was miserable, but are the decendants of slavery better off?

Assuming everything else would be the same as they are today? For the most part, yes, they are better off than most Africans.

Are white Americans better off than most black Americans?

If the answer is yes (and here's a hint: IT IS), then how can black Americans be thankful for slavery?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Guynemer
If the answer is yes (and here's a hint: IT IS), then how can black Americans be thankful for slavery?

Simply because they are still better off than they would have been.