Racism: a History
In the framework of the commemoration of the abolition of slavery, the BBC has been commissioning a number of films documenting racism and its origins. One of the most interesting is called Racism: a History, which traces the record of racism from its 16th century origins to present day racism in Britain and elsewhere.
It covers ideas on race from antiquity on, the genocide committed by the conquistadores, the emergence of the slave trade, the genocide committed by King Leopold II in the Congo Free State which cost an estimated 10 million Congolese lives, the Namibian genocide, racial segregation under the Jim Crow laws in 20th century America, the apartheid regime of South Africa, the origins of the Black and White Minstrel Show, recent race riots in Britain and more beside that. In essence, the documentary shows with tremendous clarity that white-on-black racism in particular, historically speaking is driven by profit.
Although it's a must-see, this is not for the faint of heart: a number of horrific and in today's world unimaginable crimes carried out by whites on blacks in pre and post-WW II America are shown too, a part of history that has largely been airbrushed out of the history books of that country.
Part 1:
Parts 2 to 6 can be found here.
Related post on the commemoration of the abolition of slavery
posted by Gert @ 11:17 AM
20 comments
20 Comments:
Is the enormous crime waves they generate in every country they reside in just payback?
Firstly, the "enormous crime waves" are largely a figment of your overheated and racist imagination.
Most crime is acquisitive and correlates well with poverty. Black people still have a considerably higher representation in the least affluent part of society. Once freed they weren't all that free but definitely penniless. White slave owners were compensated for their loss of property at the time of the abolition, but freed slaves got zilch. In many respects they're still trying to bridge the gap we've managed to created, in large part on their backs.
In spite of anti-discrimination laws, racism still exists in Britain and there is some pretty gruesome and mindless white-on-black going on too. Old habits die hard...
It is not in my imagination at all and you know damn well that it is real.
"Racist" is just an Orweillian label / smear used as a neo-witch word to shut down any debate of the bleeding obvious. It is a device of control and the suppression of the freedom of speech and is largely bandied around, curiously, by people that deny race even exists.
Even Tony Blair - the man most responsible for the uncontrolled immigration into the UK - said this week:
"people had to drop their political correctness and recognise that the violence would not be stopped "by pretending it is not young black kids doing it".
The blacks here are not 'freed slaves' as you bizarrely contend but economic immigrants from every part of Africa and every part of the Caribbean.
The fact that they mostly are less affluent is purely down to their own failings, not 'racist' society-as a society, as you pointed out, that allows discrimination against itself, the majority, clearly cannot be racist at all.
Naive, perhaps, misled and gullible but not racist or intent on 'subjugating' anyone.
The fact that wherever blacks reside, even in countries with no history of slavery, negates your baseless point.
And if you want credible statistics of black crime and its grossly disproportionate effects, I will be more then happy to provide them.
Sentinel:
""Racist" is just an Orweillian label / smear used as a neo-witch word to shut down any debate of the bleeding obvious."
Trust a conspiracy nut to come up with that one. Racism has a long history and many pseudo-scientific attempts have been made to justify it. Nothing "Orwellian" about that at all.
Frankly, I don't understand what you're trying to achieve here. You've already said enough to illustrate your points over here.
Despite your long ramblings your position is simple: 'black people are inferior to white people because they are less intelligent, that's why they commit more crime'. That's a racist position in the purest sense of the word. Ergo you are a racist and proud of it too. No amount of semantic juggling will change that because even if you were right you'd still be a racist.
"Scientific racism" was developed to justify treating another "inferior" race as cattle and much, much worse beside that. There simply is no proper scientific basis for the existence of "human races", unless you simply want to take colour of skin, hair and eyes as manifestations of "race".
Let me ask you one simple question. Was the misery and death White Man bestowed on millions of black people justified in your view? Even if you do believe they are inferior?
It is not for me to answer for the past actions of this country or any other; it is way beyond my control, remit or liability. Just as, by the same token, Blair' slavery 'apology' was devoid of any foundation in reality.
Let me ask you a simple question, do you believe in the existence of race?
Sentinel:
"It is not for me to answer for the past actions of this country or any other; it is way beyond my control, remit or liability."
Deflection and dodging, plain and simple. I'll take it as a 'yes' then.
"Let me ask you a simple question, do you believe in the existence of race?"
You know I don't. Nor is it a matter of "belief". All "racist theory" has been relegated to the trashcan of history, except by those who have a vested interest to keep old crocs alive, like you.
The average genetic variation between black people is larger than the average differences between black people and white people. There are of course gene-pools, but they tend to be large and diffuse. You don't understand genetics or "blood science" at all. By your "definition" how many of these "races" exist, do you think? The idea of "racial purity" is old and really an old wives tale. When I hear East Y'shiremen talk about West Y'shiremen I get the impression that they find these "Wessies" genetically inferior too... Everybody likes to think the group they belong too is the best in the whole, wide world.
In the case of white-on-black racism there was also a very strong economical motive to keep the myth of the "humanoid black race" going.
"Deflection and dodging, plain and simple. I'll take it as a 'yes' then."
You know I don't agree with it; I have answered that before. As I said, I think that interactions of that sort led to our current downfall.
"You know I don't"
Then why the hell do you insist on calling people 'racist' if you believe that races do not exist? If, by your account, they do not exist the word is superfluous; defunct; without meaning.
But you seem to love its usage.
How strange.
And you know already, I have countered all of your contentious with science. Your only recourse was to say that you had never heard of the scientists who are behind the research: as if only 'celebrity' scientists have any merit!!!!
Sentinel:
I use the term "racism" because it's the one that's got stuck in our language. I'm an atheist, perhaps I shouldn't use biblical expressions either, ferchrissake?
Scientist don't have to be celebrities but valid science is published in peer-reviewed journals, little of what you have shown comes even close to that.
So, you don't understand science either, huh? Sorry, but I do (and I've got the degree to prove it...)
" use the term "racism" because it's the one that's got stuck in our language"
So you just follow the crowd like a sheep, bleating 'racist' whenever the feeling takes you.
"Scientist don't have to be celebrities but valid science is published in peer-reviewed journals"
Science is political lie anything else in this world and research into racial differences is ot PC and anyone not PC is destroyed.
"little of what you have shown comes even close to that."
They are all qualified, respected scientists. If you disagree, show me some evidence of their academic failings or political motivations.
"So, you don't understand science either, huh? Sorry, but I do (and I've got the degree to prove it...)"
Yeah righto.
You can get degrees in Eastenders and the Simpsons, it proves nothing but the abaility to regurgitate.
But seeing as you like academia so much and rank people by it, the people you are criticising have doctorates and professorships and grossly out rank you, and your 'knowledge of science.'
I don't necessarily believe there is no such thing as race, or at least isolation uniqueness. Take Ethiopia winnings and high placings in Olympic Marathon events.
Why are blacks generally much faster sprinters than whites?
Why are blacks so over represented in sports like football and basketball?
And as far as intelligence goes, I believe that isolated breeding can contribute to that as well. Evolution pretty much confirms that animals that have an abundance of food, and a lack of predators, don't have to be as smart as those who have to forage for food and defend themselves from predators.
You can say that these are two different types of intelligence if you like.
Sentinel:
You're a racist and you're proud of it. What's the problem in me saying so, huh? Do you feel a tad guilty, perhaps?
You're also a rabid anti-Semite and probably a homophobe. Well done, you've nearly got the full set. You're one of the biggest arseholes I've come across on the Internet in many years.
That's the end of this conversation, as far as I'm concerned. Now bugger off.
BEAJ:
Gene-pools do of course exist but they tend to be large and diffuse with plenty of leakage and influx.
And so, yes, within such gene-pools certain traits can become slightly accentuated. Fairly straightforward traits like tallness (for instance) can thus become slightly more pronounced and can be an advantage in certain sports or other activities. But even in sports social trends play an important part.
In Britain e.g. young people look more and more to a career in music and entertainment, as a way of getting fast-tracked to richness. Clearly this is not evolution (although you could call it cultural evolution', I guess) but simply another (hopefully passing) fad.
As regards "intelligence", we keep beating around the bush by calling it different things: mental agility, mental ability, smart etc etc. None of these terms is any easier to define as the others, though.
Take the example of a successful footballer (soccer) like David Beckham. Beckham comes across to most people as "not very bright". Yet his limb coordination is incredible and he's one of the best soccer players in the world. Well, learning something creates synapses between the neurons of our brain, that is how something we have learned (and have trained for or have experience with) becomes "etched" in our brain. Beckham's brilliance on the football pitch is therefore due to incredible brain activity. Is that a form of intelligence? I believe so.
Even the most intelligent people (going by IQ) can be extremely dumb in other respects: poor in relationship building, bad with money, arrogant or cocky, criminal and many other things most of us would consider "not so smart" (I'm not implying "intelligent" people have such characteristics but some do).
Yet the most complex of traits, this most elusive of all human traits, continues by many to be used as a yardstick of the ability the "human races".
"Gene-pools do of course exist "
Yes, they are called races.
"And so, yes, within such gene-pools certain traits can become slightly accentuated"
Such as committing crime and leaving your family.
"Beckham's brilliance on the football pitch is therefore due to incredible brain activity. Is that a form of intelligence? I believe so."
Its a form of intelligence, yes, but he is hardly likely to win the Pulitzer prize with it, or gain one your awe inspiring degrees.
"Yet the most complex of traits, this most elusive of all human traits, continues by many to be used as a yardstick of the ability the "human races".
Actually, it is mainly achievements (or lack of them) on national and continental levels and the behaviour of the offspring of these peoples in western countries tat is the yardstick generally applied.
Zimbabwe, once the "bread basket of Africa" under white rule is now reduced to starvation and rodent eating under blacks, for example with inflation running at 1594%, for example.
But I'll bet you have some excuses lined up for that disaster too.
Sentinel:
With you everything is "race". By your yardstick your extended family is a "human race" too. Which comes pretty close to the ludicrous numbers of races "scientists" started to discover after Galton.
A Pulitzer prize is more valuable than making 50 k a week (or whatever it is)? I think it's rather relative.
Degrees don't inspire awe in you? Yet you claim all these wannabee-scientists you quote are reputable.
You try and define everything in racial terms and then get pissed off when someone considers you to be a racist. You're an oxymoronic moron.
I get 'pissed' off by people that say that race doesn't exist revelling in 'moral' smugness by shouting 'racist' at others.
That's the definition of 'oxymoronic moron.'
Sentinel:
There's no moral smugness on my part. You're simply a deluded fool and an extremist to boot. This way you don't have to feel like a sheep, I guess. Well done... (not). There's plenty more idiots where you came from...
And your still an 'oxymoronic moron'- race doesnt exit but im going to shout 'racist 'anyway!
And yes, there a lot of people waking up to the grim reality that this multicult experiment has failed miserably and with catastrophe, worsening with each year.
The tide will turn shortly and reason will reign again.
Sentinel:
In this imminent "New Age of Reason", who will be allowed to live in White Britain? Will it suffice for residents/citizens to be card carrying members of the "White Race" or will they have to be of proven "Good British Stock" as well? Of Anglo-Saxon blood? Or would "Nordic" suffice? Better start planning because there will be lots to do in your "race bureaucracy"...
And what about other undesirables, such as British Jooos, gays, lefties and generally speaking people of "below average intelligence"? What about people of "mixed colour"?
Sentinel, have one consolation. In the unlikely event that twats like you could fulfil their wet dream fantasies of racial purity, I'll have emigrated by then: I wouldn't want to burden you and your ilk in your sterile, white brave new world...
I doubt you will emigrate, more likely traitorous twats like you would be thrown out.
Sentiprat:
Treason against which cause, exactly? Are you going to run for public office with your platform? Please do, we need more comedians in politics...
And do try and answer the questions.
Post a Comment
<< Home