Question for those among us who are Black

[konradv]

If it were in your power to do so, would you go back to the early 1600s and (somehow) eliminate the institution of slavery across the entire western hemishpere?

And you think slavery is only a black and western hemisphere thing?

How about ask the question: Would you (being black) go back in time and not go into the bush, catch your enemies tribes peoples and sell them to the whites.

And if anyone says that they would not try and stop it as per your question.... is crazy.

Don't really see what selling your enemies has to do with it. That's how slavery worked from time immemorial. It's western slavery that changed things by making your race a reason. In the past you could become a slave by war, criminality or debt. To put the notion of race into the reasons why other Africans would capture and sell to whites, is to inject an ethic that wasn't part of the equation at the time, but a peculiarity of American slavery.

 

[konradv]

The vast majority of them did -not- return home.

Basically that was the Indians' problem with the whole situation. They didn't mind tourism, it was all those people that stayed on with their strange diseases, customs, weird gods and jibber-jabber talk that bothered them

Missing the point.......

Making my own point.

 

[M14 Shooter]

lets not be up in arms about something that cant be changed....
what about the slaves that exist in todays culture? and no we are not talking submissives

Red herring. Please address the issue presented.

 

[Full-Auto]

If it were in your power to do so, would you go back to the early 1600s and (somehow) eliminate the institution of slavery across the entire western hemishpere?

If we are going back in time, why not warn the native Americans to the liberal onslaught and slaughter.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'm not black but the Indian in me might want to go back and make sure every European that comes to these shores never returns home..........

The vast majority of them did -not- return home.

Basically that was the Indians' problem with the whole situation. They didn't mind tourism, it was all those people that stayed on with their strange diseases, customs, weird gods and jibber-jabber talk that bothered them

Well, of course.
I'm just surprised that the pwerosn I responded to was so happy to see them stay.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'm not black but the Indian in me might want to go back and make sure every European that comes to these shores never returns home..........

The vast majority of them did -not- return home.

The vast majority still don't make up none.......

So.. you would have had them -all- stay here?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Not black but I would eliminate it - since no1 else really answered.

If that were the case most blacks would still be back in Africa starving to death.
I don't like that part of our history but don't you think it's time we moved on???

I didn't start the thread.
Slavery is wrong at all points in history, so given the chance I'd always eliminate it.
100% of the time. The side effects don't matter.

Do you suppose that the majority of blacks in the US would be willing to give up all that they presently have in order to have elimintaed slavery?

 

[G.T.]

If that were the case most blacks would still be back in Africa starving to death.
I don't like that part of our history but don't you think it's time we moved on???

I didn't start the thread.
Slavery is wrong at all points in history, so given the chance I'd always eliminate it.
100% of the time. The side effects don't matter.

Do you suppose that the majority of blacks in the US would be willing to give up all that they presently have in order to have elimintaed slavery?

They wouldn't necessarily have to - that's a hypothetical and assumes people haven't migrated here from Africa SINCE slavery was abolished.

They have, and they continue to.

 

[HUGGY]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UH1CMCtV4to&ob=av2n]Bryan Ferry - Slave To Love - YouTube[/ame]

 

[jaybags]

is this a rhetorical question?

 

[M14 Shooter]

I didn't start the thread.
Slavery is wrong at all points in history, so given the chance I'd always eliminate it.
100% of the time. The side effects don't matter.

Do you suppose that the majority of blacks in the US would be willing to give up all that they presently have in order to have elimintaed slavery?

They wouldn't necessarily have to - that's a hypothetical and assumes people haven't migrated here from Africa SINCE slavery was abolished.

They have, and they continue to.

Sure - a few, probably a tiny proportion. Thats why I asked about the majority.
So, what do you suppose...?

 

[M14 Shooter]

is this a rhetorical question?

Nope.

 

[G.T.]

Do you suppose that the majority of blacks in the US would be willing to give up all that they presently have in order to have elimintaed slavery?

They wouldn't necessarily have to - that's a hypothetical and assumes people haven't migrated here from Africa SINCE slavery was abolished.

They have, and they continue to.

Sure - a few, probably a tiny proportion. Thats why I asked about the majority.
So, what do you suppose...?

I suppose that most noble people would take others' wrongs and sufferings away if they could, even if it meant a sacrifice. That's what being human is all about.

The thread question is kind of silly anyways, it wreaks of trying to make the "see, it was for your own good eventually" point, which is kind of short sighted.

 

[M14 Shooter]

They wouldn't necessarily have to - that's a hypothetical and assumes people haven't migrated here from Africa SINCE slavery was abolished.

They have, and they continue to.

Sure - a few, probably a tiny proportion. Thats why I asked about the majority.
So, what do you suppose...?

I suppose that most noble people would take others' wrongs and sufferings away if they could, even if it meant a sacrifice. That's what being human is all about.

Ok... but that doesn't really answer my question.
I asked about your supposition regarding the "majority of blacks", not "the majority of noble people". These are different sets of people - though, obviously, there is an overlap in their venn circles.

The thread question is kind of silly anyways, it wreaks of trying to make the "see, it was for your own good eventually" point...

I dont recall making that point, or even leading up to it.

 

[G.T.]

Sure - a few, probably a tiny proportion. Thats why I asked about the majority.
So, what do you suppose...?

I suppose that most noble people would take others' wrongs and sufferings away if they could, even if it meant a sacrifice. That's what being human is all about.

Ok... but that doesn't really answer my question.
I asked about your supposition regarding the "majority of blacks", not "the majority of noble people". These are different sets of people - though, obviously, there is an overlap in their venn circles.

The thread question is kind of silly anyways, it wreaks of trying to make the "see, it was for your own good eventually" point...

I dont recall making that point, or even leading up to it.

The question itself implies THAT point, and so do your responses to the responses. Don't hide behind your intent, you're assuming that people conclude that Slavery was for their own good, there's no other rational reason to respond the way you have. Honestly.

My supposition is that the majority of blacks would abolish slavery if ever given the chance. If not, ALL of them. And anyone who wouldn't is NOT A GOOD PERSON.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I suppose that most noble people would take others' wrongs and sufferings away if they could, even if it meant a sacrifice. That's what being human is all about.

Ok... but that doesn't really answer my question.
I asked about your supposition regarding the "majority of blacks", not "the majority of noble people". These are different sets of people - though, obviously, there is an overlap in their venn circles.

The thread question is kind of silly anyways, it wreaks of trying to make the "see, it was for your own good eventually" point...

I dont recall making that point, or even leading up to it.

The question itself implies THAT point, and so do your responses to the responses. Don't hide behind your intent, you're assuming that people conclude that Slavery was for their own good, there's no other rational reason to respond the way you have. Honestly.

You suppose a lot for someone not inside my head. Perhaos your own prejudices are sneaking in to your posts...?

My supposition is that the majority of blacks would abolish slavery if ever given the chance. If not, ALL of them.

Even if it meant the very real chance that they, if they existed at all, would have virtually none of the things they have today?
Really?

And anyone who wouldn't is NOT A GOOD PERSON.

Hm.. What did you say my intent here was?

 

[syrenn]

If it were in your power to do so, would you go back to the early 1600s and (somehow) eliminate the institution of slavery across the entire western hemishpere?

And you think slavery is only a black and western hemisphere thing?

How about ask the question: Would you (being black) go back in time and not go into the bush, catch your enemies tribes peoples and sell them to the whites.

And if anyone says that they would not try and stop it as per your question.... is crazy.

Don't really see what selling your enemies has to do with it. That's how slavery worked from time immemorial. It's western slavery that changed things by making your race a reason. In the past you could become a slave by war, criminality or debt. To put the notion of race into the reasons why other Africans would capture and sell to whites, is to inject an ethic that wasn't part of the equation at the time, but a peculiarity of American slavery.

Lets see... putting the notion of race into it slavery.

i suggest you look at the title of the thread.


Slavery is not just a black thing. Nor is it just a western hemisphere thing.


The op is asking if you would try and stop/eliminate (black) slavery if you could go back in time.

If you want to eliminate black slavery back then... then you have to eliminate the ones who went into the bush to capture black people.... and that was other black people.

I did not put the notion of black into anything....

 

[G.T.]

Ok... but that doesn't really answer my question.
I asked about your supposition regarding the "majority of blacks", not "the majority of noble people". These are different sets of people - though, obviously, there is an overlap in their venn circles.


I dont recall making that point, or even leading up to it.

The question itself implies THAT point, and so do your responses to the responses. Don't hide behind your intent, you're assuming that people conclude that Slavery was for their own good, there's no other rational reason to respond the way you have. Honestly.

You suppose a lot for someone not inside my head. Perhaos your own prejudices are sneaking in to your posts...?

My supposition is that the majority of blacks would abolish slavery if ever given the chance. If not, ALL of them.

Even if it meant the very real chance that they, if they existed at all, would have virtually none of the things they have today?
Really?

And anyone who wouldn't is NOT A GOOD PERSON.

Hm.. What did you say my intent here was?

"even if it meant"

Yes, "even if it meant" that.

Why do you assume otherwise?

If you had to choose between your luxuries and the torture and mastery of other human beiongs, you'd choose your luxuries?

No, and anyone who would is sick. That's what make asking the question asinine to begin with.

It's like saying "would you suck a dick for a million dollars"
"Would you kill a toddler if it meant saving your american dream?"

it's just a sickly premised thought/question.

 

[gallantwarrior]

I'm not black but the Indian in me might want to go back and make sure every European that comes to these shores never returns home..........

I think a great number of them didn't.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The question itself implies THAT point, and so do your responses to the responses. Don't hide behind your intent, you're assuming that people conclude that Slavery was for their own good, there's no other rational reason to respond the way you have. Honestly.

You suppose a lot for someone not inside my head. Perhaos your own prejudices are sneaking in to your posts...?


Even if it meant the very real chance that they, if they existed at all, would have virtually none of the things they have today?
Really?

And anyone who wouldn't is NOT A GOOD PERSON.

Hm.. What did you say my intent here was?

"even if it meant"
Yes, "even if it meant" that.
Why do you assume otherwise?
If you had to choose between your luxuries and the torture and mastery of other human beiongs, you'd choose your luxuries?

That's pretty much the effective question. Very good.
See - and you thought it was all about thanking the white man for slavery. Silly you.

No, and anyone who would is sick.
That's what make asking the question asinine to begin with.

No, that's why you don't --like-- the question -- deep down you believe that the -majority- of blacks would likely refuse to give up what they have so that slavery never existed, and so, by your standard, are 'sick'.

Nothing asinine about it.