[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/his/ - History & Humanities



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



Hello /his/ I have a question on the history of slavery in the United States. Given America’s massive immigrant population, it makes sense to say that most people living here are not even two or three generations deep; therefore it was really only a small portion of the population that actually owned plantations and enslaved Africans. Does it even make sense to hold a grudge against white people at large because of this? (Wasn’t it white people that freed them too?)

Just curious.
>>
>>4990680
No, it doesn’t, but this is where the new narrative of white privelige comes in- even though neither you nor your ancestors took part, they would say you somehow still benefit from the racial hierarchy it established, and are therefore a contributer to racism yourself.

It’s bullshit conjured up to justify blatant racism, but what do you expect from identarians?
>>
>>4990680
Still benefitted from the institution of slavery.
And lincoln may have freed the slaves, but there was still a long hard slog to enfranchisement and establishing universal civil rights.
Part of my family came over as indentured irish servants, another part were abolitionist menonites. And the last major part were norwegian immigrants in the late late 1800s. Personally I don't feel any responsibility for slavery, but I can still acknowledge it's generally shitty to treat human beings like property.
>>
>>4990680
It's ridiculous. As >>4990690 said, it's only a way to justify blatant racism. Granted, I have roots in America that date back to the Mayflower, but any involvement that my ancestors had in slavery after that point until now still have no bearing on me, because I don't own slaves and despise racism from anyone.
>>
>>4990709
>Still benefitted from the institution of slavery.

How exactly?
>>
>>4990680
First let me say that holding a grudge against somebody because of something only his ancestors did is retarded to begin with, so your point is moot.
Second, racism and prejudices against groups in the general sense rely on holding the cultural practices and mentality accountable, so in that sense people believing themselves part of mainstream american culture would make them a target (a wrong one, since slaveholding was a minority phenom and the practice started being culturally loathed almost two centuries ago, but w/e) regardless of how long they've been part of the group.
Third, I very much doubt that the average american family came here three generations ago. That would mean 30-60s. Five to ten is much more likely.
>>
>>4990859
It's pretty simple desu. Whites (at least in the north) were at a distinct advantage over blacks for buying homes, getting jobs, recieving education, etc. Poverty is in fact, rather cyclical, and since blacks that moved to the north after the civil war were often poor, their descendants today are poor. Having this misconception of either "wahhh whiteys are evil" or "I recieved no benefits from my ancestors being able to exploit a population" is ignorant.
>>
>>4990680
Oh hey its the Godard loving manlet from /tv/

Inb4 I could snap your neck like a chicken
>>
>>4990680
I think by and large the grudge against whites, specifically by blacks in the US isn't properly informed. There are plenty of reasons for American blacks to be upset at the institutions of the past, whether they are recent immigrants or their ancestors were slaves here. When you separate recent African immigrants, I think they are affected less by racism and institutionalism because they haven't lived through all of it. Descendants of slaves however, are much more likely to be frustrated with whites and with the institutions and social structure of the leaders of this country.
As a white man, I can safely say that racial conflict was created by the upperclasses ro divide those already without power, and those at the bottom of our structure tend to be the most racist, whether black or white.
>>
>>4990918
>Having this misconception of either "wahhh whiteys are evil" or "I recieved no benefits from my ancestors being able to exploit a population" is ignorant.
In fairness, your reasoning basically assumes that by virtue of being able to be passed down, those benefits are still being passed down, which isn't a given.
If grandpa took advantage of racism to buy a house (let's assume that was the single advantage of racism for the sake of the example), but then dad gambled it away and his generation also abolished the advantage of racism, what advantage did I in fact get out of racism? Fuck all.
The situation is extremely nuanced, and the only reason a group or individual would have to simplify it would be to push an agenda.
>>
Here's a pro tip for the whiteys in this thread:

Black people would want you to bend over for them even if their great-great grandparents weren't slaves. You have non-white immigrants in European countries that either BARELY or not-at-all participated in 'colonialism' and they still cry about the indigenous whites, guilt trip, wield 'racism' as a tool to get what they want, etc. They don't want 'equality', what they want is what benefits THEM, their racial and/or ethnic group. Slave morality is a pretext for exploiting rival tribes' gaps in the armor.

Whiteys are so lodged in late Rome tier decadence they can't fathom that Humans are animals and evolutionary behavior doesn't change. Bourgeois living conditions creates self-hating ideology-puffers who can invent a million different ways to excuse their pet brown people from any wrong. Christianity has also created a guilt culture that used to be limited to inside the in-group, what used to be monolithically homogenous. Now it has been expanded universally through the secular "Enlightenment", and whites are expected to be this universal individualist race of non-racial people, who support their individual nu-tribe of political/economic/spooky faction.

Whitey can pretend 'race is just skin color' all he wants. After being brainwashed from birth to believe that, why wouldn't you? It's comfier that way. You won't be called a 'racist' if you just ignore everything. Meanwhile, non-white third worlders are very much in contact with their 'racism'/tribalism/nationalism, whatever. Just keep believing they want 'equality' and a color-blind society (of course only in your white countries, not in theirs).
>>
>>4990859
From inception our economy has been based largely on slave labor. Nobody here would ever have gotten rich without a supply of free labor producing raw materials for trade and manufacture. We benefit by dint of the fact that we have a country at all, let alone a rich and powerful one. Our high standard of living, going back to colonial times, was in part a result of slavery. Note that there was almost nothing like a white underclass prior to urbanization, when that slot was filled by more recent immigrants. That's fucking unheard of. It's because we had a black underclass instead.

More directly, modern whites benefit from the eternal benefit of the doubt extended by decent people to other people who aren't behaving egregiously badly. Blacks do not enjoy the benefit of the doubt to the degree whites do. This affects our every interaction in daily life, our job and education prospects, our romantic lives etc. etc. All of these things affect our self-worth and our views on society, its rules and values, and the importance of social norms.
>>
>>4990918
The whole point of this thread is that my ancestors were either not in USA at the time of slavery or weren’t even wealthy enough to own them. Therefore I don’t see how your point applies
>>
>>4991194
lmao, das some cray cray revisionism
leftists be inane yo
>>
>>4991207
Maybe if you read his post it would be clearer? Blacks stayed poor after Emancipation. Their children have been poor as well. Having a whole segment of society generally relegated by birth to low wage service and production work with limited opportunity for advancement:
1. improves your living conditions
2. increases your purchasing power
3. and clears a path for you to attain opportunities that are denied to others based on prejudice.
You don't benefit only if your family owned slaves or participated in the slave economy, you benefit simply because you're white. People treat you better. They give you more chances. They have higher expectations and more trust in you.

>>4991212
What part of it? Even those early leaders who despaired of slavery recognized that it was so ingrained in our economy that to end the institution would invite disaster.
>>
>>4990680
Why are nazis always some gym autists?
>>
>>4990680
Literally 33% of households in the South (all that could afford them) owned slaves in 1860. Up to 50% in some states.
http://www.civilwarcauses.org/stat.htm
>>
File: 1494011113034.png (16 KB, 420x420)
16 KB
16 KB PNG
>>4991348
And that's a good thing
>>
>>4991207
That's irrelevant because it's not actually about any kind of historical connection. The point is to act as a bludgeon to silence debate and ensure compliance with whatever political endeavors the person "fighting racism" or what not is trying to enact. This is why you get weird shit like
>Poles are guilty of committing the Holocaust
>Finns are guilty of committing slavery in the USA
>European immigrants to the USA post-Civil War are guilty of committing slavery in the USA
>Russians are guilty of committing slavery in Brazil
>Japanese and Koreans are guilty of aiding in Jim Crow
>White Americans are guilty of committing the Holocaust

And so on and so forth. It's obviously factually wrong, but that's not the point. The point is to setup a narrative by which one side can utterly remove any opposition from engaging in political debate. Any mental gymnastics to explain why it's wrong (>>4991309, >>4991207, >>4990918) are obviously going to be inherently incorrect because the basic premise is visibly a false statement, but that's not why they're done: they're a means of keeping dissenters from within from objecting to the alienation of malcontents. After all, why should anyone listen to you, you're an evil X who did Y, you're immoral because of your inherited characteristics and must be excluded from the political process as such; you're going to get in the way if you aren't.
>>
>>4990680
>most people living here are not even two or three generations deep
This is incorrect.
>>
>>4991194
I'm mostly with you, but this "benefit of the doubt" does actually reflect lived experience, at least in the region I'm from. Blacks commit a *HUGELY* disproportionate percentage of violent crime relative to their population. I don't have anything against blacks collectively, I'm actually quite sympathetic. But when I'm walking down the street alone at night, and I need to make calculated decisions in order to ensure my safety, it would be tremendously stupid of me to ignore known tendencies. On principle I don't like this,but frankly I don't really feel much guilt over it.
>>
File: crab lift.webm (553 KB, 320x320)
553 KB
553 KB WEBM
>>4991329
cope harder.
>>
>>4991309
So then this isn’t just a American benefit, the whole world benefited from slavery at some point, Rome was built by slaves, Egypt, Persia, the Great Wall of china, the great monuments of India, Slavery was a universal human institution until very recently
>>
>>4991369
Yeah, this is true. It's common sense to use more caution in a neighborhood with a bad reputation, even if that reputation may be overblown. Being satisfied that you're right-minded isn't worth more than being safe.

That said, there's no reason this should always carry over to, say, a job interview. It's a habit people learn for one situation and it can affect how they act in other ones.

>>4991361
>Finns are guilty of committing slavery in the USA
You're strawmanning and that's not even a word I use. Nobody is trying to "silence" you. Nobody is telling you that you are personally guilty of slavery. Nobody has ever said that. What people don't like is when you get defensive about it and insist that racial dynamics across a number of generations in a racist country haven't favored you as a member of the favored group. What people don't like is how you bristle at the suggestion that life ain't fair, you've got an advantage you have always had and can never lose, and you didn't earn it.

Nobody's asking you to turn in your white card, just admit that it's better to have one than not.
>>
>>4991412
Yes, absolutely. But we've been a "modern" country since inception, and it is a historical embarrassment that we'd hold ourselves to the standards of ancient tyrannies all while bitching about "tyrranyyyyyyy" and shooting guns off.

I dunno, I love my country and I have a lot of faith in it. Part of that means expecting better from people, or at least holding them to what they claim to believe.
>>
>>4991412
>>4991570
I'll also add that the demographic effects of American slavery as opposed to everywhere else in the world are much more marked and persistent. That's due in large part to the fact that the African slave trade differed from older institutions in that blacks were considered be, categorically, a slave race. The same factors that justified this, such as lower social development, a perceived lack of mental subtlety, and a propensity for "animal" behavior are some the same factors which inform contemporary racism.

Who can say now who's descended from Helots? Who can say what inherited traits relegated them to bondage? Their descendants don't bear the stigma today. But blacks do.
>>
>>4991719
Woah, sounds like whites treated the Bantus the way the Bantus treat Pygmies to this day.
Shit, will blacks ever figure out on their own slavery is wrong, or do they have to be colonized and civilized again?
>>
>>4991759
I sincerely do not know

Maybe we can just wait for the Chinese to figure that one out.
>>
>>4991309
Maybe it has to do with statistics and not skin color
>>
>>4990709

>Still benefitted from the institution of slavery

But the blacks live in the same society and thus also benefited?
>>
>>4990918

>since blacks that moved to the north after the civil war were often poor, their descendants today are poor

This is very simplistic reasoning. All you need to do to escape poverty is hold down a job and/or do well in school. There's literally nothing holding back blacks today, quite the opposite, they are in a privileged position (affirmative action).
>>
>>4991010

This also. We have Africans and arabs in Sweden trying to guilt trip us Swedes even though we have ZERO common history, ZERO history of any kind of oppression.
>>
>>4992322
Institutionalized racism is still a thing tho
>>
>>4991782
They'll just stripe mine them and leave.
>>
>>4992316
>All you need to do to escape poverty is hold down a job and/or do well in school
That's also simplistic. Additionally, it sidesteps entirely the fact the schools and jobs generally available to blacks are worse. In a competitive market, this really hampers mobility for all but the best and brightest, while simply toeing the line is usually enough for a white guy to keep his head above water. A black person has to exceed all expectations -- and first she must set, or have set for her, high expectations from her family or community. It might be hard for you to imagine just how hard that is, especially when people like you are always saying shit like this, like it's A-B-C to get out of the fucking hood, and richly indeed, that they actually have advantage over Mason and Brooke from Biglawn, Connecticut. They know damn well you don't mean to encourage them; they know that you think they should be ashamed of their parents, their grandparents, and themselves for missing this mythical free ride to middle-class bliss.

Tell me, did you claw your way out of Banjorape, Appalachia to start a successful business or something? No? Then don't talk shit about how facile social mobility is.

>>4992467
That's what it looks like...they aren't even employing locals. The only benefits are flowing to officials. I somehow doubt that this is the end-game of a big soft-power initiative, though, so hopefully they get around to a little collaborative nation-building instead of just building.
>>
>>4991194
>Nobody here would ever have gotten rich without a supply of free labor producing raw materials for trade and manufacture.
Complete bullshit. America has an incomprehensibly vast supply of raw materials. There's no way America could have ever not become rich.
>>
>>4992316
Anyone that says
>All you need to do to escape poverty is hold down a job and/or do well in school
Has obviously not moved out of his parents yet or ever experienced poverty or discrimination
>>
>>4992505
>America has an incomprehensibly vast supply of raw materials
And next to nobody to go and retrieve them until the Irish showed up to work for coupons and a tin o' grog. Or, as the case may be, for nothing, on a commuted death sentence.

The American Colonies first established a standard of health and living. THEN they turned their sights to preserving those standards, by throwing off the royal yoke. Nobody wanted to follow in London's mold, with its filth, its poverty, its crime, its smoke and disease. Industry, as we know, damages the health and living standards for those engaged in it. If not for free or forced labor, the extraction of many of these resources would have created a white underclass. With class tension like that in England, do you think the colonies would have united at all under the would-be aristocrats and oligarchs? Would the benefits of representation and suffrage have been extended to them? As it was, the Founders were wary of the less-well-heeled. Just imagine if they had a teeming cohort soot-covered, tuberculic dipsos to wrangle. The voiceless and spiritually broken hordes of slaves nearly doomed our founding by their mere presence. Just imagine if their white equivalents had clamored for a piece of the pie.

TL;DR Somebody would have gotten rich but everybody else would be roasting potatoes in slag piles.
>>
>>4992605
Interestingly enough, it's almost as if race was used as a way to generate conflict in the working class of the United States. I wonder who would benefit from the disunion of those without resources? Hmm




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.