bytor2112 Posted November 5, 2009 Report Posted November 5, 2009 (edited) Slavery was a vile and evil institution. Greed and lack of human compassion. Truly a blight on human kind. Please note that the link has nothing to do with my comments....which are my sincere held views. Just thought the article was interesting and thought you might as well. - Bytor Edited November 6, 2009 by bytor2112 Quote
sixpacktr Posted November 5, 2009 Report Posted November 5, 2009 Seems so easy to start calling everyone a 'racist' that doesn't hold with your enlightened beliefs. And Cleon Skousen, to boot. I've read 'The 5000 Year Leap', as well as his series of the 1st 4000 years. Funny, can't find anything racist in any of these books, which, it would seem to me, would be impossible to hide, given how he is just a dispicable, typical Mormon racist. But then, I guess that makes ME a racist as well, since I don't see it in his writings, right? Unbelievable. Choose to be offended, and guess what? You'll find that you are... Quote
bluedreams Posted November 5, 2009 Report Posted November 5, 2009 Unbelievable. Choose to be offended, and guess what? You'll find that you are...To note, i don't think you're a racist....or even Skousen necessarily. Quote
bytor2112 Posted November 5, 2009 Report Posted November 5, 2009 Racism exists....but, the word is thrown around all too often and has become a political tool to divide people. I do believe that people are often racially insensitive perhaps (oh my....did I just say insensitive) but not necessarily racist. Sometimes people dislike a particular behavior that they wrongly attribute to race....that is just ignorance....not racism. Quote
Elphaba Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 · Hidden Hidden I agree - I think the lot of the slave owners were much worse off than (not equal to) that of the African Americans. I think it is harder to live with a guilty conscience, to live as a sinner, than to live as an innocent.Astonishing. That has to be the most obtuse paragraph I've ever read.No, the white men who owned black human beings, men, women and children, did not feel guilty about it. They felt the opposite. They believed they had the supreme (supremacy) right to own black human beings as property.In fact, only a quarter of Southern whites owned black human beings, and of those, eighty percent owned only twenty or fewer. Practically speaking, slavery did not help the remaining 75% of the population, most of them farmers. However, most of them did aspire to owning slaves, as it was deemed a requirement to join the privileged class.Yet it was more insidious than that, for slavery gave these white Southerners a group of people to feel superior to. The farmers may have been poor, but they were not black, and they were not slaves. They gained a sense of power simply by being white.So, no, the white men who owned black men, women and children did not feel guilty whatsoever. In fact, they were so furious at the government’s threat to outlaw their right to own these people, they went to war over it.What part of any of the above sounds like "guilt"?　Elphaba
Elphaba Posted November 5, 2009 Report Posted November 5, 2009 (edited) I agree - I think the lot of the slave owners were much worse off than (not equal to) that of the African Americans.Astonishing. That has to be one of the most obtuse sentences I've ever read.No, the white men who owned black human beings, men, women and children, did not feel guilty about it. They felt the opposite. They believed they had the supreme (supremacy) right to own black human beings as property.In fact, only a quarter of Southern whites owned black human beings, and of those, eighty percent owned only twenty or fewer. Practically speaking, slavery did not help the remaining 75% of the population, most of them farmers. However, most of them did aspire to owning slaves, as it was deemed a requirement to join the privileged class.Yet it was more insidious than that, for slavery gave these white Southerners a group of people to feel superior to. The farmers may have been poor, but they were not black, and they were not slaves. They gained a sense of power simply by being white.So, no, the white men who owned black men, women and children did not feel guilty whatsoever. In fact, they were so furious at the government’s threat to outlaw their right to own these people, they went to war over it.Slave owners lived fearful, miserable, hateful, loveless, sad little lives.Based on what evidence?As I noted above, men in the Southern states who owned black men, women and children were considered members of the privileged class. People wanted to own slaves. And again, these people went to war over the right to continue to own black human beings. What part of that says "fearful, misearble, hateful, loveless, sad little lives?You're guilty of what is called "presentism." You think that becuase it is unthinkable to own a black human being today, it must have been unthinkable to those who did it in the past. You're wrong. ElphabaUPDATE: Obviously it's impossible to say that every single solitary slave owner was fine with it because there are always going to be exceptions to the rule. So I will qualify my comment and say by far, the vast majority of people in the South who owned slaves were just fine with it.Elphaba Edited November 5, 2009 by Elphaba Quote
Elphaba Posted November 5, 2009 Report Posted November 5, 2009 Slavery was a vile and evil institution. Greed and lack of human compassion. Truly a blight on human kind. Why use the truth to be sarcastic?The article was interesting; however, I don't understand the point unless you're just providing an interesting link that happens to be about slavery. Otherwise, it has nothing to do with the issue at hand, which is Skousen's racist comments in his book. I'd actually like to respond to this article, but I'm afraid it would confuse things, because except for one thing, I agree with it.Elphaba Quote
Moksha Posted November 6, 2009 Author Report Posted November 6, 2009 Beck did try to illustrate his point with evil and communistic symbols on the doors of Rockefeller Center. Here is more:In your experience, do such symbols help or hurt a building? Quote
bytor2112 Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 Why use the truth to be sarcastic?The article was interesting; however, I don't understand the point unless you're just providing an interesting link that happens to be about slavery. Otherwise, it has nothing to do with the issue at hand, which is Skousen's racist comments in his book. I'd actually like to respond to this article, but I'm afraid it would confuse things, because except for one thing, I agree with it.ElphabaSarcastic? You misread me....no sarcasm....absolute sincerity and I thought the article interesting. Always thinking the worse of me, Elph......I always give YOU the benefit of the doubt! Quote
Elphaba Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 Always thinking the worse of me, Elph......I always give YOU the benefit of the doubt!As you should. I have yet to replace a perfectly good title with one that does not fit the actual article.Elphaba Quote
bytor2112 Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 (edited) As you should. I have yet to replace a perfectly good title with one that does not fit the actual article.ElphabaOh... I get it. The article link was an after thought......made a change to clarify. Edited November 6, 2009 by bytor2112 Quote
jadams_4040 Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 Racism exists....but, the word is thrown around all too often and has become a political tool to divide people. I do believe that people are often racially insensitive perhaps (oh my....did I just say insensitive) but not necessarily racist. Sometimes people dislike a particular behavior that they wrongly attribute to race....that is just ignorance....not racism. do you know anyone whom might think this way when it comes to president Obama? Quote
bytor2112 Posted November 6, 2009 Posted November 6, 2009 · Hidden Hidden do you know anyone whom might think this way when it comes to president Obama?I am sure there are many who hate him because of the color of skin. If you are suggesting that I fit that description, you are very wrong and I have NEVER commented in anyway that would suggest that. Make no mistake about it, I disapprove of his policies....not the color of his skin.
bytor2112 Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 do you know anyone whom might think this way when it comes to president Obama?Think which way? That some are accused of being racist for criticizing President Obama? Yep. Quote
Elphaba Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 Seems so easy to start calling everyone a 'racist' that doesn't hold with your enlightened beliefs. And Cleon Skousen, to boot. I've read 'The 5000 Year Leap', as well as his series of the 1st 4000 years. Funny, can't find anything racist in any of these books, which, it would seem to me, would be impossible to hide, given how he is just a dispicable, typical Mormon racist.But then, I guess that makes ME a racist as well, since I don't see it in his writings, right?Unbelievable. Choose to be offended, and guess what? You'll find that you are...With the exception of the so-called "typical Mormon racist," I agree with everything you've written.Elphaba Quote
bluedreams Posted November 6, 2009 Report Posted November 6, 2009 In your experience, do such symbols help or hurt a building?Help of course, they make it look cool and they are giving their message of supporting communism upfront at the door. With luv,BD Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.