How racist is America compared to other countries?

[Unkotare]

Sorry, but you two are off your rockers on this one. Historically, virtually every people believed they were superior to all other people. Europeans just made it popular to encourage, for economic reasons as opposed to plain-faced military conquest, the combination of tribalism and egotism that are tendencies of all people.

The simple fact that Europeans invented the negroid, mongoloid, caucazoid terms doesn't mean they invented the concept that "people who don't look like us ain't like us". I don't think "gaijin" was derived from Latin.

Gaijin just means "person from another country" or "outsider"

Yes, and it has no negative connotations. That's why it's still used so frequently in mixed company and not considered remotely discourteous.

Like how my name can't properly be written in hiragana, because that's not the alphabet used for foreign words or pronouns. Separate but equal, I guess

That is a linguistic issue, not a social/racial one.

 

[Unkotare]

Sorry, but you two are off your rockers on this one. Historically, virtually every people believed they were superior to all other people. Europeans just made it popular to encourage, for economic reasons as opposed to plain-faced military conquest, the combination of tribalism and egotism that are tendencies of all people.

The simple fact that Europeans invented the negroid, mongoloid, caucazoid terms doesn't mean they invented the concept that "people who don't look like us ain't like us". I don't think "gaijin" was derived from Latin.

Gaijin just means "person from another country" or "outsider"

Yes, and it has no negative connotations. That's why it's still used so frequently in mixed company and not considered remotely discourteous.

Like how my name can't properly be written in hiragana, because that's not the alphabet used for foreign words or pronouns. Separate but equal, I guess

Don't get me wrong, I'm only using the Japanese example because it's a non white people with a language I'm alright with, I'm not trying to back homeboy's claim that they're exceptionally racist, just making the point that everybody's got racist tendencies apparent in their history, not just whites.

Point not in dispute.

 

[Yarddog]

...You seem to be going out of your way to bring in Arabs as well as to shift the focus from the European transporters to Africans...

Just helping to spread the good cheer... spreading the blame to the historically accurate multiple parties who share substantial guilt in the matter.

The bizarre fact is, slavery has appeared on every continent and within every race; Europeans enslaving Europeans, Africans enslaving Africans, Asians, Native Americans etc, so its presence in Africa was the norm in the world -- not the exception...

It's also largely a matter of when slavery was ended as a practice, in Region A or B, and, in connection with One's Own, rather than The Other Guy.

...What was new about the transatlantic commerce was the concept of shipping said slaves to an entirely different part of the world on a journey that to its human cargo must have seemed effectively like one of us being abducted by aliens and sent to a distant planet. It was a whole new level of meaning to the already-iffy concept of slavery and begat the invention of the instrument used to justify such a new paradigm: racism...

Yep.

...Africans did not invent that. Nor did Arabs.

Hmmmmm...

You seem in rather insistent upon defending Africans and Arabs in this matter.

Perhaps I should not have chimed-in with an accurate sharing of the blame amongst parties... it detracts from the Bash ****** Festival.

Meanwhile...

I don't know enough about African slavery across the continent to say whether they invented anything analogous in their own travels, although, my Spidey-Sense tells me that they were sufficiently 'local' or 'regional' so that there was very little cross-over between regions within the African continent, for slavery that they practiced in the inner regions.

I DO know that the Muslim-Arab slavers of the Barbary Coast and beyond (east and west along the shores of the Med) engaged in the bulk transport of their slaves throughout much of the then-known world, to include all of North Africa, the Middle East, Turkey, Persia and beyond, so, I'm not so sure the Arabs deserve to be let off the hook as lacking something analogous in their own right.

The Muslim-Arab slave-trade was far too profitable not to have invented such analogies over the many and long centuries that they were the world's Premiere Slave Traders.

I'm pointing out that you seem desperate to hang a combination Arab/African coat of paint on what was in fact a European practice. The fact is, as you just agreed above, racism was invented (by Europeans) to rationalize their treatment of human cargo as business capital, and the fact is Africans and Arabs did not. Ergo there is nothing to "defend" involving either group for a simple nonexistence of the practice.

Now when some revisionista attempts to distort history to bizarre misshapen forms, I'll be there to push it back into the shape in which it belongs. If that's an issue, then... don't distort the history in the first place.

Racism been around a long time, Arabs been shipping east africans to Arab countries for hundreds of years before Europeans, Ive been to fort Jesus in Mombasa which was controlled by the Sultan of Oman, after they conquered it from the Portuguese, Ive stood in the walkway where they loaded slaves into ships, Arab ships. Omanis made a lot of money off the slave trade. The reason you dont see blacks in arab countries is because they were all castrated.

the Arabs were the ultimate racists of their time

10 Facts About The Arab Enslavement Of Black People Not Taught In Schools - Atlanta Blackstar

"Racism".... "slave trading". Know the difference.

Racism means the judgment that one race is inferior to another. That's not a necessary element of slaving. Slavery went on for eons without the concept that a particular race was some inferior species. When European merchants started shipping slaves across an entire ocean to a new world they had nothing to do with, being not prisoners of war or born into slavery, the concept of an inferior race had to be invented. Before that time Africans were known in Europe without any particular connotation of "inferiority".

but the arabs castrated the african males so they couldnt reproduce, i kinda see that as racist. And the arabs shipped them deep into arab regions as well. They treated them like animals, i would say just as much as they were treated in the New world, so whats really the difference? I just dont see it

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Sorry, but you two are off your rockers on this one. Historically, virtually every people believed they were superior to all other people. Europeans just made it popular to encourage, for economic reasons as opposed to plain-faced military conquest, the combination of tribalism and egotism that are tendencies of all people.

The simple fact that Europeans invented the negroid, mongoloid, caucazoid terms doesn't mean they invented the concept that "people who don't look like us ain't like us". I don't think "gaijin" was derived from Latin.

Gaijin just means "person from another country" or "outsider"

Yes, and it has no negative connotations. That's why it's still used so frequently in mixed company and not considered remotely discourteous.

Like how my name can't properly be written in hiragana, because that's not the alphabet used for foreign words or pronouns. Separate but equal, I guess

That is a linguistic issue, not a social/racial one.

And when black people had to use separate water fountains, it was an issue of hygiene.

And when they couldn't go to the same schools as white people, it was just so that people born with different genetic attributes could be taught in manners tailored to suit their natural abilities.

One of the things I respect infinitely about the Japanese culture is that their language doesn't -technically- have any words that are profane. Everything's context.

That said, every language is transformed over long periods of time by common context. The word, "faggot" was once completely innocuous. After a couple generations of being used specifically to degrade homosexuals, however, you can't call a person a faggot in a non-insulting manner without the two of you having a specific, predetermined understanding that you don't mean it in the typical way.

Similarly, "gaijin" carried the unspoken presumption of inferiority for long enough that you are literally the first person of Japanese descent who has ever tried to tell me that it's a perfectly polite thing to call someone. I'm sorry, but the old Japanese attitude of racial/cultural supremacy is common knowledge, and even if it wasn't, the language betrays it. Your ancestors were not uniquely multicultural. Don't fret, though. Even people and cultures that welcomed others in with open arms, historically, were rarely without their own "we are the chosen" mentality.

 

[Unkotare]

Sorry, but you two are off your rockers on this one. Historically, virtually every people believed they were superior to all other people. Europeans just made it popular to encourage, for economic reasons as opposed to plain-faced military conquest, the combination of tribalism and egotism that are tendencies of all people.

The simple fact that Europeans invented the negroid, mongoloid, caucazoid terms doesn't mean they invented the concept that "people who don't look like us ain't like us". I don't think "gaijin" was derived from Latin.

Gaijin just means "person from another country" or "outsider"

Yes, and it has no negative connotations. That's why it's still used so frequently in mixed company and not considered remotely discourteous.

Like how my name can't properly be written in hiragana, because that's not the alphabet used for foreign words or pronouns. Separate but equal, I guess

That is a linguistic issue, not a social/racial one.

And when black people had to use separate water fountains, it was an issue of hygiene.......

Utterly unrelated red herring.

 

[Unkotare]

Sorry, but you two are off your rockers on this one. Historically, virtually every people believed they were superior to all other people. Europeans just made it popular to encourage, for economic reasons as opposed to plain-faced military conquest, the combination of tribalism and egotism that are tendencies of all people.

The simple fact that Europeans invented the negroid, mongoloid, caucazoid terms doesn't mean they invented the concept that "people who don't look like us ain't like us". I don't think "gaijin" was derived from Latin.

Gaijin just means "person from another country" or "outsider"

Yes, and it has no negative connotations. That's why it's still used so frequently in mixed company and not considered remotely discourteous.

Like how my name can't properly be written in hiragana, because that's not the alphabet used for foreign words or pronouns. Separate but equal, I guess

That is a linguistic issue, not a social/racial one.

And when black people had to use separate water fountains, it was an issue of hygiene.

And when they couldn't go to the same schools as white people, it was just so that people born with different genetic attributes could be taught in manners tailored to suit their natural abilities.

One of the things I respect infinitely about the Japanese culture is that their language doesn't -technically- have any words that are profane. Everything's context.

That said, every language is transformed over long periods of time by common context. The word, "faggot" was once completely innocuous. After a couple generations of being used specifically to degrade homosexuals, however, you can't call a person a faggot in a non-insulting manner without the two of you having a specific, predetermined understanding that you don't mean it in the typical way.

Similarly, "gaijin" carried the unspoken presumption of inferiority for long enough that you are literally the first person of Japanese descent who has ever tried to tell me that it's a perfectly polite thing to call someone. I'm sorry, but the old Japanese attitude of racial/cultural supremacy is common knowledge, and even if it wasn't, the language betrays it. Your ancestors were not uniquely multicultural. Don't fret, though. Even people and cultures that welcomed others in with open arms, historically, were rarely without their own "we are the chosen" mentality.

You are trying to impose your own preconceived notions where they do not apply. Insistence will not make it so.

 

[Unkotare]

you are literally the first person of Japanese descent....

I am not of said descent.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Sorry, but you two are off your rockers on this one. Historically, virtually every people believed they were superior to all other people. Europeans just made it popular to encourage, for economic reasons as opposed to plain-faced military conquest, the combination of tribalism and egotism that are tendencies of all people.

The simple fact that Europeans invented the negroid, mongoloid, caucazoid terms doesn't mean they invented the concept that "people who don't look like us ain't like us". I don't think "gaijin" was derived from Latin.

Gaijin just means "person from another country" or "outsider"

Yes, and it has no negative connotations. That's why it's still used so frequently in mixed company and not considered remotely discourteous.

Like how my name can't properly be written in hiragana, because that's not the alphabet used for foreign words or pronouns. Separate but equal, I guess

That is a linguistic issue, not a social/racial one.

And when black people had to use separate water fountains, it was an issue of hygiene.......

Utterly unrelated red herring.

No, not unrelated. It's the same "us and them" mentality that virtually every people exhibited throughout history.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Sorry, but you two are off your rockers on this one. Historically, virtually every people believed they were superior to all other people. Europeans just made it popular to encourage, for economic reasons as opposed to plain-faced military conquest, the combination of tribalism and egotism that are tendencies of all people.

The simple fact that Europeans invented the negroid, mongoloid, caucazoid terms doesn't mean they invented the concept that "people who don't look like us ain't like us". I don't think "gaijin" was derived from Latin.

Gaijin just means "person from another country" or "outsider"

Yes, and it has no negative connotations. That's why it's still used so frequently in mixed company and not considered remotely discourteous.

Like how my name can't properly be written in hiragana, because that's not the alphabet used for foreign words or pronouns. Separate but equal, I guess

That is a linguistic issue, not a social/racial one.

And when black people had to use separate water fountains, it was an issue of hygiene.

And when they couldn't go to the same schools as white people, it was just so that people born with different genetic attributes could be taught in manners tailored to suit their natural abilities.

One of the things I respect infinitely about the Japanese culture is that their language doesn't -technically- have any words that are profane. Everything's context.

That said, every language is transformed over long periods of time by common context. The word, "faggot" was once completely innocuous. After a couple generations of being used specifically to degrade homosexuals, however, you can't call a person a faggot in a non-insulting manner without the two of you having a specific, predetermined understanding that you don't mean it in the typical way.

Similarly, "gaijin" carried the unspoken presumption of inferiority for long enough that you are literally the first person of Japanese descent who has ever tried to tell me that it's a perfectly polite thing to call someone. I'm sorry, but the old Japanese attitude of racial/cultural supremacy is common knowledge, and even if it wasn't, the language betrays it. Your ancestors were not uniquely multicultural. Don't fret, though. Even people and cultures that welcomed others in with open arms, historically, were rarely without their own "we are the chosen" mentality.

You are trying to impose your own preconceived notions where they do not apply. Insistence will not make it so.

No, you are!

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

you are literally the first person of Japanese descent....

I am not of said descent.

My mistake. In my experience, people are typically only so dogmatically defensive of their -own- peoples' culture.

Then again, that rarely applies to Japanese people I've known. They tend to be equally proud and critical of their history, as are most who honestly assess their own culture. You definitely struck me as an odd bird given the shoes I assumed you were wearing.

 

[Pogo]

you are literally the first person of Japanese descent....

I am not of said descent.

My mistake. In my experience, people are typically only so dogmatically defensive of their -own- peoples' culture.

Then again, that rarely applies to Japanese people I've known. They tend to be equally proud and critical of their history, as are most who honestly assess their own culture. You definitely struck me as an odd bird given the shoes I assumed you were wearing.

Don't waste your time on that one. He's a troll whose only goal in life is to jump in with Contrarianism. Post "the sky is blue" and he'll gainsay that too.