|
|
Post by kuatorises on Apr 4, 2020 14:13:14 GMT
Yeah, but who cares? You're talking about someone who DIED 72 years ago. He was born 151 years ago, for Christ's sake. The Civil War ended 4 years before he was born. You can't judge people like that by modern morals and ethics. Would you have said that if a white European had said it ? I think anyone who's ever had an intelligent discussion about our founding fathers, older relatives, or past - and has a modicum of common sense - has done just that.
Seriously, fuck off with your misguided outrage and "gotcha" attempts. I'm glad everyone is giving you shit over it.
|
|
|
|
Post by onethreetwo on Apr 4, 2020 14:30:10 GMT
I don't know anything about Gandhi outside of a few quotes I read a long time ago, but he doesn't strike me as a hateful person.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirty Santa PaulsLaugh on Apr 4, 2020 14:41:20 GMT
No. The first quote he was saying kids SHOULDN'T be raised to believe their race is better. He was using Kaffir in the ironic sense to make a point. You have to factor in culture and time period. Silly goose. Would this have been your answer is Gandhi was a white European? White racism of American historical characters is generally acknowledged in by most US historians. All the founding fathers were. It’s important to understand their racism, it’s cultural origins, and how it shaped our nation’s beginnings. And when Ben Franklin writes about the racial superiority of white Englishmen over not white enough Germans, it’s to be read in the context of his times and the type of man he was. As for the Gandhi comments. The context of the quotes should be read before passing judgment on whether they are meant as derogatory comments or there’s a point behind speaking as such. Just a quick look at wikipedia denotes “kaffir” (an Arab word meaning non-believer) was adopted when the Dutch and British colonialists moved into South Africa. They did not necessarily consider it a racial slur at the time. So Gandhi probably did not mean it the way the OP thinks. From Wikipedia
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 4, 2020 14:51:49 GMT
Place it in historical context. Gandhi lived and worked in South Africa during his early adult life. The country was segregated and he first championed the civil rights of his own people, the Indians. You can't apply today's racial standards to people who lived over a century ago.But Gamey, what about the history of US slavery which is still a big issue with many? I believe the U.S. Government owes reparations to the descendants of African-American slaves for allowing U.S. citizens to be enslaved in defiance of the U.S. Bill of Rights. That's a legal issue. However, I don't personally blame anyone who grew up in 18th century for believing slavery was acceptable. It was an established economic practice at the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Apr 4, 2020 15:16:20 GMT
Would you have said that if a white European had said it ? I think anyone who's ever had an intelligent discussion about our founding fathers, older relatives, or past - and has a modicum of common sense - has done just that.
Seriously, fuck off with your misguided outrage and "gotcha" attempts. I'm glad everyone is giving you shit over it.
Oh my what a little snowflake Getting offended because i asked a question. Do you want your mommy ?
|
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Apr 4, 2020 18:22:39 GMT
I think anyone who's ever had an intelligent discussion about our founding fathers, older relatives, or past - and has a modicum of common sense - has done just that.
Seriously, fuck off with your misguided outrage and "gotcha" attempts. I'm glad everyone is giving you shit over it.
Oh my what a little snowflake
Getting offended because i asked a question. Do you want your mommy ? You're so bothered about racial slurs a guy who was born 150 years ago used that you not only made a thread about it, you passively aggressively (didn't even have the balls to outright say it to people) accused 90% of the people who responded racist. You don't get to use words like snowflake and offended.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Apr 4, 2020 19:01:56 GMT
Getting offended because of a question, what a bunch of snowflakes you people are well some of you. seriously someone reported it?? I didnt even get a chance to read the whole thing… and now i dont know what all the fuss is about...
|
|
|
|
Post by onethreetwo on Apr 4, 2020 19:07:19 GMT
Getting offended because of a question, what a bunch of snowflakes you people are well some of you. seriously someone reported it?? I didnt even get a chance to read the whole thing… and now i dont know what all the fuss is about... Not reported. I don't think anyway. Admin even participated in the discussion a bit. The OP was quoted if you want to see what it was.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Apr 4, 2020 19:27:16 GMT
But Gamey, what about the history of US slavery which is still a big issue with many? I believe the U.S. Government owes reparations to the descendants of African-American slaves for allowing U.S. citizens to be enslaved in defiance of the U.S. Bill of Rights. That's a legal issue.However, I don't personally blame anyone who grew up in 18th century for believing slavery was acceptable. It was an established economic practice at the time. I understand you are primarily talking about the US as you are (I presume) an US citizen. But out of curiosity, I wonder - do you believe that to be an US issue only? Or should reparations be given to the descendants of ANY slaves Anywhere, when it means the government allowed enslaving of its nationals/citizens/people who lived/were born there? I mean look at all the countries and the timelines. How would that even work? or just those who were kidnapped/sold from somewhere else? would it have to be a different country or a different town is enough? There is a lot of slavery history all over the world, applying to any/all races and ethnicities at one point or another.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 4, 2020 20:08:06 GMT
Getting offended because of a question, what a bunch of snowflakes you people are well some of you. seriously someone reported it?? I didnt even get a chance to read the whole thing… and now i dont know what all the fuss is about... Nobody reported this thread. Apparently the OP didn’t like something somebody said so he took his ball and went home.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 4, 2020 20:08:36 GMT
I believe the U.S. Government owes reparations to the descendants of African-American slaves for allowing U.S. citizens to be enslaved in defiance of the U.S. Bill of Rights. That's a legal issue.However, I don't personally blame anyone who grew up in 18th century for believing slavery was acceptable. It was an established economic practice at the time. I understand you are primarily talking about the US as you are (I presume) an US citizen. But out of curiosity, I wonder - do you believe that to be an US issue only? Or should reparations be given to the descendants of ANY slaves Anywhere, when it means the government allowed enslaving of its nationals/citizens/people who lived/were born there? I mean look at all the countries and the timelines. How would that even work? or just those who were kidnapped/sold from somewhere else? would it have to be a different country or a different town is enough? There is a lot of slavery history all over the world, applying to any/all races and ethnicities at one point or another. I can only speak to slavery in America. Other nations will have to look at their own past. African-Americans have half the net family income of white Americans. The wealth and labor stolen impacts them to this day. If your great great grandfather's wealth was stolen that puts you at a disadvantage today. And the U.S. Constitution enshrined slavery and said blacks were 3/5 of a human being. Our government clearly owes payback.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 4, 2020 20:21:18 GMT
And the U.S. Constitution enshrined slavery and said blacks were 3/5 of a human being. Are you making shit up again?
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Apr 4, 2020 22:04:06 GMT
*deletes thread because he doesn't like responses* *calls everyone else snowflakes*
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Apr 5, 2020 0:46:03 GMT
But Gamey, what about the history of US slavery which is still a big issue with many? I believe the U.S. Government owes reparations to the descendants of African-American slaves for allowing U.S. citizens to be enslaved in defiance of the U.S. Bill of Rights. That's a legal issue. However, I don't personally blame anyone who grew up in 18th century for believing slavery was acceptable. It was an established economic practice at the time. Gamey, that belies what you commented on earlier, about standards from over 100yrs ago. What is the difference then? Legal, historic, social context, establishment decree, it doesn't matter. It is now used as a crux to scream oppression. We know legality is full of selective reasoning and hypocrisies, we just need to learn from past mistakes. Africans even enslaved their own and sold their own to the white traders.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Apr 5, 2020 0:47:43 GMT
*deletes thread because he doesn't like responses* *calls everyone else snowflakes* It was a trigger thread to call out his own notion of racism.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 5, 2020 2:16:09 GMT
And the U.S. Constitution enshrined slavery and said blacks were 3/5 of a human being. Are you making shit up again? You should know this stuff:
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 5, 2020 2:21:52 GMT
I believe the U.S. Government owes reparations to the descendants of African-American slaves for allowing U.S. citizens to be enslaved in defiance of the U.S. Bill of Rights. That's a legal issue. However, I don't personally blame anyone who grew up in 18th century for believing slavery was acceptable. It was an established economic practice at the time. Gamey, that belies what you commented on earlier, about standards from over 100yrs ago. What is the difference then? Legal, historic, social context, establishment decree, it doesn't matter. It is now used as a crux to scream oppression. We know legality is full of selective reasoning and hypocrisies, we just need to learn from past mistakes. Africans even enslaved their own and sold their own to the white traders. Legal documents in writing which have the force of law and the state behind them are very different than one person's personal bias. The problem with the U.S. Constitution is that it guarantees its citizens certain inalienable rights in one place, and then takes those rights away arbitrarily from others based on race. The U.S. Government is 250 years old. It still exists and it must be held accountable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 5, 2020 2:26:15 GMT
Are you making shit up again? You should know this stuff: "The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise reached among state delegates during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention. Whether and, if so, how slaves would be counted when determining a state's total population for legislative representation and taxing purposes was important, as this population number would then be used to determine the number of seats that the state would have in the United States House of Representatives for the next ten years. The compromise solution was to count three out of every five slaves as people for this purpose. Its effect was to give the Southern states a third more seats in Congress and a third more electoral votes than if slaves had been ignored, but fewer than if slaves and free people had been counted equally. The compromise was proposed by delegate James Wilson and seconded by Charles Pinckney on June 11, 1787." Counting three out of five slaves for legislative representation and taxing purposes based on population does not translate to individuals being "3/5 of a human being."
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Apr 5, 2020 2:34:48 GMT
Gamey, that belies what you commented on earlier, about standards from over 100yrs ago. What is the difference then? Legal, historic, social context, establishment decree, it doesn't matter. It is now used as a crux to scream oppression. We know legality is full of selective reasoning and hypocrisies, we just need to learn from past mistakes. Africans even enslaved their own and sold their own to the white traders. Legal documents in writing which have the force of law and the state behind them are very different than one person's personal bias. The problem with the U.S. Constitution is that it guarantees its citizens certain inalienable rights in one place, and then takes those rights away arbitrarily from others based on race. The U.S. Government is 250 years old. It still exists and it must be held accountable. Governments need to be held accountable for many things, but what is relevant today\now, not what has already passed.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Apr 5, 2020 2:47:43 GMT
You should know this stuff: "The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise reached among state delegates during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention. Whether and, if so, how slaves would be counted when determining a state's total population for legislative representation and taxing purposes was important, as this population number would then be used to determine the number of seats that the state would have in the United States House of Representatives for the next ten years. The compromise solution was to count three out of every five slaves as people for this purpose. Its effect was to give the Southern states a third more seats in Congress and a third more electoral votes than if slaves had been ignored, but fewer than if slaves and free people had been counted equally. The compromise was proposed by delegate James Wilson and seconded by Charles Pinckney on June 11, 1787." Counting three out of five slaves for legislative representation and taxing purposes based on population does not translate to individuals being "3/5 of a human being." Regardless, it devalued African-Americans as being worth only 60% of a white person. In a true republic, they would have been counted as one person and given the vote.
|
|