Slave Trader Edward Colston's statue torn down in Bristol

El_Duderino 09

mick087 wrote: »

I carnt answer that because i have never lived in the U.S.A.


There is without doubt discrimination in Ireland for anyone thats not Irish.
Thats Black eastern european Asian.

I dont beieve discrimination in todays Ireland comes from slavery it comes from your ownself. When i lived in London i lived amongst so many people from so many countries. That experience people educated me that white people are the same as red indians, rich people go the loo same as me. That we all have a repessed history at some point in history.

Ah come on now. You don't need to be in the USA to know that black people experience systemic disc over there. But it does show how far you're willing to go to pretend you don't understand the point.

You asked the difference between Brian Boru and more recent slavers. I explained the difference and you're now pretending you don't know if there is discrimination against black people in the USA.

joe40

Cupatae wrote: »

The main thing that grinds my gears is the blaming of white people or using white privilege to justify arguments , to me trying to get rid of racism and using statements like that you are just pissing in the wind those statements in of themselves are racist.

Ya America certainly leads the way for alot of things, and is definitely going to have a knock on affect the world over.

I don't think anyone can complain in Ireland infairness we have it pretty good in the grand scheme of things.

The term white privilege is bandied around and is silly in an Irish context but not so much in an American one.

I don't take it as blaming whites but just an acknowledgement of the advantage it can be to be White.

Similar to the advantage class can give you in Britain.

This was posted in a different thread, worth a listen in my view.
He never once uses the word white privilege but listen to what he is talking about.

https://mobile.twitter.com/PACAF/status/1268794618461618177

Bannasidhe

SafeSurfer wrote: »

So you are clarifying that what you said about slavery in Europe being about one race enslaving another was incorrect and that European “race slavery” represents a fraction of “European slavery” both in terms of years of operation and number of slaves?

Thanks for the clarification.

If you want to get really nit picky technical about it there was no concept of 'Europe' in the Classical period, there was Roman Empire and Not Roman Empire.

In the Middle Ages the collective term applied to the landmass was 'Christendom'.

The concept of there being a 'Europe' as we think of it really began in the Early Modern Period, when the Reformation fractured 'Christendom' causing the Holy Roman Empire to lose much of the land it had previously oversaw (the Protestant German states, and what is now the Netherlands), and Rome no longer held sway over the whole continent so that unifying force was gone.

The Dutch, English, some Germans, Swedes, Danes, and some Swiss rejected the notion of Christendom due to its links with Roman Catholicism.

The idea of Europe was born at the same time as the idea of sovereign nation states as we would think of them.

This Early Modern Period is, coincidently, when the European slave trade based completely on the sale of Sub-Saharan Africans began. There were attempts to press Native Americans into slavery by the Spanish in South America but this was forbidden by the Papacy - permission was given only for negro slaves.

So, technically, slavery in Europe (as a concept of a place rather than a geographical landmass) being about one race enslaving another is correct.

Slavery in the time of the Roman Empire (both in it's lands and outside them), and Christendom existed but 'Europe' did not, and that version of slavery was not based on race.

I hope that clarifies it further for you.

mick087

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ah come on now. You don't need to be in the USA to know that black people experience systemic disc over there. But it does show how far you're willing to go to pretend you don't understand the point.

You asked the difference between Brian Boru and more recent slavers. I explained the difference and you're now pretending you don't know if there is discrimination against black people in the USA.

On no dont get me wrong i well belive some of the worst discrimination on the planet still goes on in the U.S.A. I dont think its the fact they are black more the fact its the poorist communities.

Maybe im wrong, but what i have seen in my time living in the UK to what i see on tv does not match. What i have seen in the UK is the police brutally discriminate againt anyone who is black white or Asian from certin areas.
I can also say the same here, not on as bigger scale as the UK but the garda brutally discriminate anyone be they black white Asian from certin areas.


Maybe the cops dont discriminate againt poor whites Asians and lantinos in america but i have to admit i find that hard to believe. But im open minded on that.

Edgware

mick087 wrote: »

On no dont get me wrong i well belive some of the worst discrimination on the planet still goes on in the U.S.A. I dont think its the fact they are black more the fact its the poorist communities.

Maybe im wrong, but what i have seen in my time living in the UK to what i see on tv does not match. What i have seen in the UK is the police brutally discriminate againt anyone who is black white or Asian from certin areas.
I can also say the same here, not on as bigger scale as the UK but the garda brutally discriminate anyone be they black white Asian from certin areas.


Maybe the cops dont discriminate againt poor whites Asians and lantinos in america but i have to admit i find that hard to believe. But im open minded on that.

Not as open as your Ma

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Edgware wrote: »

Not as open as your Ma

She's your Ma too, Brandine.

mick087

:pac:

Edgware wrote: »

Not as open as your Ma

SafeSurfer

Bannasidhe wrote: »

If you want to get really nit picky technical about it there was no concept of 'Europe' in the Classical period, there was Roman Empire and Not Roman Empire.

In the Middle Ages the collective term applied to the landmass was 'Christendom'.

The concept of there being a 'Europe' as we think of it really began in the Early Modern Period, when the Reformation fractured 'Christendom' causing the Holy Roman Empire to lose much of the land it had previously oversaw (the Protestant German states, and what is now the Netherlands), and Rome no longer held sway over the whole continent so that unifying force was gone.

The Dutch, English, some Germans, Swedes, Danes, and some Swiss rejected the notion of Christendom due to its links with Roman Catholicism.

The idea of Europe was born at the same time as the idea of sovereign nation states as we would think of them.

This Early Modern Period is, coincidently, when the European slave trade based completely on the sale of Sub-Saharan Africans began. There were attempts to press Native Americans into slavery by the Spanish in South America but this was forbidden by the Papacy - permission was given only for negro slaves.

So, technically, slavery in Europe (as a concept of a place rather than a geographical landmass) being about one race enslaving another is correct.

Slavery in the time of the Roman Empire (both in it's lands and outside them), and Christendom existed but 'Europe' did not, and that version of slavery was not based on race.

I hope that clarifies it further for you.

I think people understand the concept of Europe in the context of its discussion of this thread. However if you want to claim you are right in what you said In an earlier post because “Europe” didn’t exist when much of the earlier slavery occurred you go right ahead.

Yellow_Fern

joe40 wrote: »

The term white privilege is bandied around and is silly in an Irish context but not so much in an American one.

I don't take it as blaming whites but just an acknowledgement of the advantage it can be to be White.

Similar to the advantage class can give you in Britain.

This was posted in a different thread, worth a listen in my view.
He never once uses the word white privilege but listen to what he is talking about.

https://mobile.twitter.com/PACAF/status/1268794618461618177

Any black person raised in Ireland is incredibly privileged.

Studies show that US black women raised in rich neighbours in the US do just as well as their neighbours. PM if you need a citation. Black disadvantage in the US is driven by history, not present day racism. Also being growing up as a black person means you are privileged by internationally standards.

Bannasidhe

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I think people understand the concept of Europe in the context of its discussion of this thread. However if you want to claim you are right in what you said In an earlier post because “Europe” didn’t exist when much of the earlier slavery occurred you go right ahead.

Given some of the posts I have read in this thread I am not assuming anything about what anyone understands.

You were the one who wanted to get technical and tell me I knew nothing about the history of slavery in Europe. I got technical back.
Do you have a counter argument beyond 'everybody knows'?

Bannasidhe

Native Americans in Minnesota have toppled a statue of Christopher Columbus.

Bit harsh given all he did was 'discover' the land they had been living on for thousands of years and declare it belonged to Spain who sent over heavily armed men and missionaries to 'save them'. Then Spain got in a fight with England and a load of Privateers (aka licensed pirates) who sounded like Worzel Gummidge started sniffing about and before they knew what was happening a bunch of Puritan boat people who were so annoying even the Dutch couldn't tolerate them arrived fixing to stay...
Then the French fancied a piece of the action... and the Dutch...and the Scottish but to be fair they were shockingly bad colonisers so that came to nothing.

Before long economic (and very smelly) refugees of European origin were spreading across the land - and spreading disease - saying it was all theirs because 'AMERICA!' and they started importing ever more unwilling Africans to do the really crap jobs.
And those pesky Natives refused to be civilised and they didn't even have deeds to the land they claimed was theirs so as squatters they were quite rightly evicted but given other land, poor soil but it's not like they farmed or anything the hunter-gatherer savages, many many maaany miles away and sure a long walk in winter is bracing and didn't they get free blankets. Oops - are they not immune to smallpox??


Totes overreaction by the Native Americans who are just trying to erase history and now we will all immediately forget about Columbus and his whole family will disappear from the pages of history books even his Mama who is generally believed to have been named Susanna but some scholars say was named Marguerite. I have forgotten them already.

*awaits additional slippery slope arguments/whataboutery/and general hyperbole*

iebamm2580

I could be completely wrong here but was there some story about residents in a cork seaside town being captured in the middle of the night by pirates and enslaved in north africa in 1600s, dont know where i remember this but could have sworn i heard that somewhere years ago.

Bannasidhe

iebamm2580 wrote: »

I could be completely wrong here but was there some story about residents in a cork seaside town being captured in the middle of the night by pirates and enslaved in north africa in 1600s, dont know where i remember this but could have sworn i heard that somewhere years ago.

It's been mentioned a few times here.

A Dutch sea captain who was a convert to Islam (and former slave himself) lead a raid on Baltimore - which was an English settler town - in 1631.

Article on it here https://www.historyireland.com/early-modern-history-1500-1700/from-baltimore-to-barbary-the-1631-sack-of-baltimore/

iebamm2580

Bannasidhe wrote: »

It's been mentioned a few times here.

A Dutch sea captain who was a convert to Islam (and former slave himself) lead a raid on Baltimore - which was an English settler town - in 1631.

Article on it here https://www.historyireland.com/early-modern-history-1500-1700/from-baltimore-to-barbary-the-1631-sack-of-baltimore/

Cheers haven't read much of the thread, put statues in museums with context, can never erase history anyway.

Bannasidhe

iebamm2580 wrote: »

Cheers haven't read much of the thread, put statues in museums with context, can never erase history anyway.

The Romans tried their damndest to erase any knowledge/memory of Carthage over 2000 years ago yet most of us have heard of Hannibal.

SafeSurfer

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Given some of the posts I have read in this thread I am not assuming anything about what anyone understands.

You were the one who wanted to get technical and tell me I knew nothing about the history of slavery in Europe. I got technical back.
Do you have a counter argument beyond 'everybody knows'?

This was your statement

“ Slavery of anyone by anyone else is objectionable - but in Europe - where we are - it was very much a matter of one group enslaving another and the colour of their respective skins was the determining factor.”

This statement is incorrect. Nothing technical about it. If you want to get technical about the historic definition of Europe I would refer you to the world map of Anaximander in the 6th century BCE.

Skin colour was not the determining factor of the majority of European slavery.

Heart Break Kid

TheValeyard wrote: »

Then again who would complain when Eastern Europeans tore down the monuments to Stalin

Some of those are still up

SafeSurfer

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Do you genuinely not know the answer to that question? Serious question I'll answer it for you if you don't know.

Go on then answer please.

BoroMan32

These brainless morons have pulled down a statue this evening right on to the head of one of their own. Oh well.

https://twitter.com/TaraLaRosa/status/1270902880225169417

Calhoun

I got to say for a protest and pulling down statues the music is great. Seems to be real chill, i think thats maybe why they had that accident.

What statues does Leo want to pull down here? Apparently there is a statue of an IRA member that he wants gone.

Paddygreen

Just is just the tip of the iceberg guys. There is still the issue of no gender equality in terms of street names. We so need to start again and totally push the progression to the max on all fronts.

Paddygreen

Paddygreen wrote: »

Just is just the tip of the iceberg guys. There is still the issue of no gender equality in terms of street names. We so need to start again and totally push the progression to the max on all fronts.

This issue isn't talked about enough..

robinph

BoroMan32 wrote: »

These brainless morons have pulled down a statue this evening right on to the head of one of their own. Oh well.

https://twitter.com/TaraLaRosa/status/1270902880225169417

The brainless morons in power might want to start paying attention to people's grievances. They are not going to stop what is happening by refusing to listen.

nullzero

robinph wrote: »

The brainless morons in power might want to start paying attention to people's grievances. They are not going to stop what is happening by refusing to listen.

So... "take down all statues immediately or else we'll keep dropping them on ourselves".

At least the people in Bristol had the sense to stand back.
Poorly organised copycat statue removals were bound to occur, one of the reasons Mob rule is a bad idea.

robinph

nullzero wrote: »

So... "take down all statues immediately or else we'll keep dropping them on ourselves".

At least the people in Bristol had the sense to stand back.
Poorly organised copycat statue removals were bound to occur, one of the reasons Mob rule is a bad idea.

Nope, say that you'll be looking into the issues around the statues, street names and the names of the military bases rather than screaming like a baby and pretending there is no problem. Saying that the names of Confederate generals, who lost in a war against the US are American heroes who deserve to have modern military bases named after them because Maga is not the way to calm down tensions.

You don't stop an angry mob by making them angrier. That just makes the mob bigger and angrier.

nullzero

robinph wrote: »

Nope, say that you'll be looking into the issues around the statues, street names and the names of the military bases rather than screaming like a baby and pretending there is no problem. Saying that the names of Confederate generals, who lost in a war against the US are American heroes who deserve to have modern military bases named after them because Maga is not the way to calm down tensions.

You don't stop an angry mob by making them angrier. That just makes the mob bigger and angrier.

So people who are too stupid to stand back from a falling statue need to have their every whim pandered to immediately or else?

ChelseaRentBoy

https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1270896048236630018

It's hard not to laugh.

robinph

nullzero wrote: »

So people who are too stupid to stand back from a falling statue need to have their every whim pandered to immediately or else?

Think you are getting confused. Where did anyone say that people who stand under things that are about to fall on them have to be listened to?

People who stand under falling objects are stupid.
People in power who don't listen to their population as they are getting angrier and angrier at the attitude and actions of the people in power are stupid
People in power whose only response to an angry population is to ignore them are stupid.

y0ssar1an22

robinph wrote: »

Nope, say that you'll be looking into the issues around the statues, street names and the names of the military bases rather than screaming like a baby and pretending there is no problem. Saying that the names of Confederate generals, who lost in a war against the US are American heroes who deserve to have modern military bases named after them because Maga is not the way to calm down tensions.

You don't stop an angry mob by making them angrier. That just makes the mob bigger and angrier.

appeasement dont work either. you stop them by enforcing the law.

I dont know how i feel about this. on the one hand i think its ridiculous, but on the other if there were a statue of hitler id support that being removed.

maybe the age of the statue. if built 1850 or before (whatever arbitrary number), then it has some historical value so should remain.

perhaps state/county votes on what should stay and what should be moved to a museum?

they should stop the mob ripping them down though.

walshb

robinph wrote: »

The brainless morons in power might want to start paying attention to people's grievances. They are not going to stop what is happening by refusing to listen.

Yes. They need to bow to a group of rioting thugs...that’s what society needs..