ADVERTISEMENT

POS President Chump blames DEI for plane crash

You keep acting like white Europeans invented slavery. They did not.
If the white Europeans were so hell bent in enslaving black people, why did they even buy the black captives? Why didn't they just save the money and enslave them all?
I never gave any implications that white Europeans invented slavery. Slavery has been around for thousands of years. What I did say that white Europeans did invent racism based on the pseudoscience of measuring skulls of blacks and whites in order to determine intelligence. During this time the concept of races, white, black, and Asian, of humans is born. Again, this is around the 16 and 17 centuries.

Your last sentence is ridiculous.
 
Never mind, I found it. Not the first racist to work in government, but his job is minor.

In contrast, I recall a racist who served not in a minor job, but as president until Jan. 20 this year. I would wager that you voted for that racist.
WhattaboutwhattaboutwhattaboutwhattaboutwhattaboutCause RivetingSaysSo

#Diverting
 
No, they're culpable, but had the labor been in the form of Chinese or Indians or (insert continent here), it wouldn't have made any difference. As 03 said, this was driven much more by economics than racism. Black Africans just happened to be the supply that met the demand at the time (mostly because it's a lot easier to sail from Europe to Africa than it is to Eastern Asia or India.) Look at a map....
Why didn’t the Europeans enslave European criminals? Much closer than Africa, don’t you think. Cheaper as they would not have to buy them. Then ship them over to the US.
 
WhattaboutwhattaboutwhattaboutwhattaboutwhattaboutCause RivetingSaysSo

#Diverting
What you call whataboutism is simply pointing out your lib hypocrisy.

You did vote for the racist Joe Crow Biden, right? The president who called the gov of Maryland "boy", etc.
 
Why didn’t the Europeans enslave European criminals? Much closer than Africa, don’t you think. Cheaper as they would not have to buy them. Then ship them over to the US.
As a student of history, you already know all of this about the history of slavery.

 
They did. Debtors prisons, indentured servants, etc.
I know. But did not sustain for a full blown workforce for servitude like they did the Africans. Indenture servants were free after a set number of years. The Africans were slaves for life in most cases.
 
Why didn’t the Europeans enslave European criminals? Much closer than Africa, don’t you think. Cheaper as they would not have to buy them. Then ship them over to the US.
That's a legitimate question. I don't know how the criminal justice system in Europe operated in the 16-18th centuries. My guess was there probably wasn't enough supply to meet demand, Also, Africans had already set up a system of enslaving the defeated tribes that they captured, so there was already somewhat of a system in place, it then just become an economic exchange.
 
For fukks sake!!! They didn't have a demand for black slaves. They had a demand for slaves. The Africans supplied them with what they wanted/needed.
He obviously has been immersed in some connections we don't understand or could leap to that thought over teh chasm that has an infinite width. Trying to explain how slavery came about and still does or trying to show that it has went on for thousands of years and is currently going on with all races involved is met with a "yeah, but..."

I have no idea what he wants relative to slavery. We all have said it was wrong even if the mores' at the time possibly didn't.
 
If you are talking about the Africans selling their war captives to the slave traders yeah I know all about that. That never been a secret. Where have you been? The Boneman and I have been talking about this for 2 days now.
The point was that the white supremists in England abolished slavery but African countries continued to allow it. How can that be explained ?
 
The point was that the white supremists in England abolished slavery but African countries continued to allow it. How can that be explained ?
That's easy. The white supremacists in the US, the Caribbean, and South America did not obviously, and the demand for slaves obviously continued. They are the ones that continued to allow it. It's not hard.

Also, it's not a matter of the African countries allowing it. It's a matter of disposing of their enemy combatants. The ones that they didn't sell to the US and elsewhere, they tortured and killed. That's what victors in wars have been doing for thousands of years. Why would the Africans be any different?

The ancient Romans and other cultures enslaved enemy combatants. If they weren't tortured and killed they were forced into gladiator spectacles. These enslaved and the enslaved gladiators in ancient Rome were made up of people from all ethnicities from Africa to Asia to Europe. Compared to the transatlantic slave trade that focused mostly on the Africans.
 
Why didn’t the Europeans enslave European criminals? Much closer than Africa, don’t you think. Cheaper as they would not have to buy them. Then ship them over to the US.
Europeans largely stopped enslaving their own people due to a combination of factors including the rise of nation-states with more centralized power, the development of a relatively equal balance of power between European nations, the emergence of alternative labor systems like serfdom, and the growing influence of Christian values that viewed enslavement of fellow Christians as morally wrong, making it increasingly impractical to enslave people within their own societies.
 
Europeans largely stopped enslaving their own people due to a combination of factors including the rise of nation-states with more centralized power, the development of a relatively equal balance of power between European nations, the emergence of alternative labor systems like serfdom, and the growing influence of Christian values that viewed enslavement of fellow Christians as morally wrong, making it increasingly impractical to enslave people within their own societies.
First of all, Christian values says that enslaving ALL humans is morally wrong. But if the Europeans actually believed that it was wrong to enslave other Christians then you just proved my point. Plus the fact that white supremacy is in full swing, and enslaving mostly the Africans was a logical solution.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Boilermaker03
That's what victors in wars have been doing for thousands of years. Why would the Africans be any different?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess the USA is unique. We helped develop Germany, France and Japan after WWII.
He!! we even gave Sanctuary Reservations to the Native Americans.
 
I guess the USA is unique. We helped develop Germany, France and Japan after WWII.
He!! we even gave Sanctuary Reservations to the Native Americans.
That's fine and dandy. But what does that have to do with the topics at hand?
 
First of all, Christian values says that enslaving ALL humans is morally wrong. But if the Europeans actually believed that it was wrong to enslave other Christians then you just proved my point. Plus the fact that white supremacy is in full swing, and enslaving mostly the Africans was a logical solution.

The Bible is clear: God endorses slavery.​


Posted on January 27, 2017


There are at least seven passages in the Bible where God is depicted as directly permitting or endorsing slavery. Two of these are in the Law of Moses: God permitted the Israelites to take slaves from conquered peoples permanently, and the Israelites could sell themselves into slavery temporarily to pay off debts (Exod 21:2-11; Lev 25:44-46). The other five passages are in the New Testament, where slavery as a social institution is endorsed and slaves are called to obey their masters “in everything” (Eph 6:5-9; Col 3:22-4:1; 1 Tim 6:1-2; Tit 2:9-10; 1 Pet 2:18-20).
But slavery is viewed positively in Scripture well beyond these commands. Owning slaves was seen as a sign of God’s blessing (Gen 12:16; 24:35; Isa 14:1-2), and there are literally dozens of passages in the Bible that speak of slavery in passing, without comment. Slavery was simply part of life, and most people saw it as just the way things always were, even the divinely ordained order of things.
slaveAnd yes, in case there is any doubt, this was real slavery: “the slave is the owner’s property” (Exod 21:21). Both Old and New Testaments called for better treatment of slaves than many of the peoples around them, and the Law of Moses in particular called for better treatment of fellow Israelites as slaves. But slaves could be beaten (Exod 21:20-21; 1 Pet 2:18-20), and slaves could be taken as concubines (Gen 16:3-4; Exod 21:8-11) or even raped without serious consequence (Lev 19:20-22).
These passages are all pretty straightforward. One could even say that the Bible is clear on this: the institution of slavery is permitted by God, endorsed by God, and owning slaves can even be a sign of God’s blessing. This has in fact been the Christian view through history: it’s only in the last 150-200 years that the tide of Christian opinion has shifted on slavery.
So why do Christians today believe slavery is wrong? Why don’t we believe “slavery is permitted by God, endorsed by God, and owning slaves can even be a sign of God’s blessing,” even though the Bible is pretty clear on this?
Well, there are two main reasons, it seems to me.
The first reason is simply that our society has shifted on this. The reasons for this are complex, but in basic terms this shift has happened because 1) a vocal minority first called for the abolition of slavery, which 2) eventually prompted governments to enact legislation abolishing slavery, and 3) the simple passage of time has normalized this disapproval of slavery among us as a western society.*
It is instructive to read arguments back and forth between Christians on African slavery during the 19th century. Christians in support of slavery—mostly powerful white landowners—pointed to all the biblical texts I’ve outlined above, along with things they saw in the Bible that supported the inferiority of Africans in particular.
But a segment of Christians—former slaves and white activists—joined others in opposing slavery. These Christians emphasized biblical teachings like “love of neighbour” and the Golden Rule and all people created in God’s image and “there is no longer slave or free in Christ.” It took decades of arguing their case, often being shamed and vilified by opposing Christians—the dispute even touched off a bloody civil war—but eventually their view won out.
The passage of laws legalized their view, and the passage of time has normalized their view. We no longer worry about the social instability that abolishing slavery might cause, nor are we concerned that somehow we’re being unfaithful to God by not following the biblical teachings on slavery.
This points to the second main reason Christians today believe slavery is wrong in spite of the clear biblical passages that permit or endorse slavery: we have developed a different hermeneutic, a different way of reading the biblical texts on slavery.
The early Christian abolitionists paved the way. Rather than emphasizing the specific Bible passages that directly approve of slavery, they looked at other biblical texts and themes that they saw as more big-picture, more transcultural and timeless: the creation of humanity in the “image of God,” the “liberation” and “redemption” themes of the Exodus, the love teachings of Jesus, and the salvation vision of Paul. That is, they set the stage for a way of reading the Bible that was not grounded in specific texts of Scripture, but in a trajectory of “Exodus to New Exodus centred on Christ,” or “Creation to New Creation centred on Christ”—a larger biblical narrative with Jesus at its heart.
Nicolas Colombel, Hagar and Ishmael
Nicolas Colombel, Hagar and Ishmael in the Wilderness
And so when Christians today read the slavery passages in the Bible, this is what we do. “Sure,” we’ll say, “the Bible says this here—but we know from Genesis 1 that all people are created in God’s image, and we know from Galatians 3 that there is no longer slave or free in Christ, and don’t forget about God redeeming Israel from slavery and Jesus’ teaching to love our neighbour as ourselves.”



In other words, we no longer take the slavery-approval passages as direct and straightforward teaching for all times and places. Rather we take these as instances of the way things were done in the past but not the way God really wants things to be. They are descriptive of what once was; they are not prescriptive of what is to be.
So the next time we hear someone talk about the “clear teaching of Scripture” on women’s roles, or saying that “the Bible is clear” on homosexuality, or whatever the topic might be, think about this: the Bible is at least as clear on slavery, yet thank God we no longer believe that slavery is God’s will. We’ve read the Bible, and we’re following Jesus.
————————————-
* I’m well aware that slavery still exists in the world, but I don’t know of any Christians who approve of it. Maybe that’s just because I don’t hang out with those Christians. [Note: Since posting this I’ve become aware of a growing contingent of Christians, especially of the Christian Nationalist strain, who actually argue that slavery was good and could even still be a good thing today. Ugh.] I’m also well aware that the abolition of slavery has not brought about full freedom and equality and justice for people of African descent in the western world. My focus here is on the institution of slavery itself, but that’s just one side of the coin: racism, both personal and institutional, is the other, and is still ongoing. See also my comments below, in particular on whether recent western slavery was radically different in kind than ancient Greco-Roman slavery.
 

The Bible is clear: God endorses slavery.​


Posted on January 27, 2017


There are at least seven passages in the Bible where God is depicted as directly permitting or endorsing slavery. Two of these are in the Law of Moses: God permitted the Israelites to take slaves from conquered peoples permanently, and the Israelites could sell themselves into slavery temporarily to pay off debts (Exod 21:2-11; Lev 25:44-46). The other five passages are in the New Testament, where slavery as a social institution is endorsed and slaves are called to obey their masters “in everything” (Eph 6:5-9; Col 3:22-4:1; 1 Tim 6:1-2; Tit 2:9-10; 1 Pet 2:18-20).
But slavery is viewed positively in Scripture well beyond these commands. Owning slaves was seen as a sign of God’s blessing (Gen 12:16; 24:35; Isa 14:1-2), and there are literally dozens of passages in the Bible that speak of slavery in passing, without comment. Slavery was simply part of life, and most people saw it as just the way things always were, even the divinely ordained order of things.
slaveAnd yes, in case there is any doubt, this was real slavery: “the slave is the owner’s property” (Exod 21:21). Both Old and New Testaments called for better treatment of slaves than many of the peoples around them, and the Law of Moses in particular called for better treatment of fellow Israelites as slaves. But slaves could be beaten (Exod 21:20-21; 1 Pet 2:18-20), and slaves could be taken as concubines (Gen 16:3-4; Exod 21:8-11) or even raped without serious consequence (Lev 19:20-22).
These passages are all pretty straightforward. One could even say that the Bible is clear on this: the institution of slavery is permitted by God, endorsed by God, and owning slaves can even be a sign of God’s blessing. This has in fact been the Christian view through history: it’s only in the last 150-200 years that the tide of Christian opinion has shifted on slavery.
So why do Christians today believe slavery is wrong? Why don’t we believe “slavery is permitted by God, endorsed by God, and owning slaves can even be a sign of God’s blessing,” even though the Bible is pretty clear on this?
Well, there are two main reasons, it seems to me.
The first reason is simply that our society has shifted on this. The reasons for this are complex, but in basic terms this shift has happened because 1) a vocal minority first called for the abolition of slavery, which 2) eventually prompted governments to enact legislation abolishing slavery, and 3) the simple passage of time has normalized this disapproval of slavery among us as a western society.*
It is instructive to read arguments back and forth between Christians on African slavery during the 19th century. Christians in support of slavery—mostly powerful white landowners—pointed to all the biblical texts I’ve outlined above, along with things they saw in the Bible that supported the inferiority of Africans in particular.
But a segment of Christians—former slaves and white activists—joined others in opposing slavery. These Christians emphasized biblical teachings like “love of neighbour” and the Golden Rule and all people created in God’s image and “there is no longer slave or free in Christ.” It took decades of arguing their case, often being shamed and vilified by opposing Christians—the dispute even touched off a bloody civil war—but eventually their view won out.
The passage of laws legalized their view, and the passage of time has normalized their view. We no longer worry about the social instability that abolishing slavery might cause, nor are we concerned that somehow we’re being unfaithful to God by not following the biblical teachings on slavery.
This points to the second main reason Christians today believe slavery is wrong in spite of the clear biblical passages that permit or endorse slavery: we have developed a different hermeneutic, a different way of reading the biblical texts on slavery.
The early Christian abolitionists paved the way. Rather than emphasizing the specific Bible passages that directly approve of slavery, they looked at other biblical texts and themes that they saw as more big-picture, more transcultural and timeless: the creation of humanity in the “image of God,” the “liberation” and “redemption” themes of the Exodus, the love teachings of Jesus, and the salvation vision of Paul. That is, they set the stage for a way of reading the Bible that was not grounded in specific texts of Scripture, but in a trajectory of “Exodus to New Exodus centred on Christ,” or “Creation to New Creation centred on Christ”—a larger biblical narrative with Jesus at its heart.
Nicolas Colombel, Hagar and Ishmael
Nicolas Colombel, Hagar and Ishmael in the Wilderness
And so when Christians today read the slavery passages in the Bible, this is what we do. “Sure,” we’ll say, “the Bible says this here—but we know from Genesis 1 that all people are created in God’s image, and we know from Galatians 3 that there is no longer slave or free in Christ, and don’t forget about God redeeming Israel from slavery and Jesus’ teaching to love our neighbour as ourselves.”



In other words, we no longer take the slavery-approval passages as direct and straightforward teaching for all times and places. Rather we take these as instances of the way things were done in the past but not the way God really wants things to be. They are descriptive of what once was; they are not prescriptive of what is to be.
So the next time we hear someone talk about the “clear teaching of Scripture” on women’s roles, or saying that “the Bible is clear” on homosexuality, or whatever the topic might be, think about this: the Bible is at least as clear on slavery, yet thank God we no longer believe that slavery is God’s will. We’ve read the Bible, and we’re following Jesus.
————————————-
* I’m well aware that slavery still exists in the world, but I don’t know of any Christians who approve of it. Maybe that’s just because I don’t hang out with those Christians. [Note: Since posting this I’ve become aware of a growing contingent of Christians, especially of the Christian Nationalist strain, who actually argue that slavery was good and could even still be a good thing today. Ugh.] I’m also well aware that the abolition of slavery has not brought about full freedom and equality and justice for people of African descent in the western world. My focus here is on the institution of slavery itself, but that’s just one side of the coin: racism, both personal and institutional, is the other, and is still ongoing. See also my comments below, in particular on whether recent western slavery was radically different in kind than ancient Greco-Roman slavery.
Well. You are the most racist individual in this forum. You should be ashamed and banned from this site with the quickness.
 

The Bible is clear: God endorses slavery.​


Posted on January 27, 2017



Nicolas Colombel, Hagar and Ishmael in the Wilderness
And so when Christians today read the slavery passages in the Bible, this is what we do. “Sure,” we’ll say, “the Bible says this here—but we know from Genesis 1 that all people are created in God’s image, and we know from Galatians 3 that there is no longer slave or free in Christ, and don’t forget about God redeeming Israel from slavery and Jesus’ teaching to love our neighbour as ourselves.”
It is difficult to reconcile the teachings of the New Testament with slavery, Certainly the summation of the Law in Galatians would forbid slavery, wouldn't it?
 
Why didn’t the Europeans enslave European criminals? Much closer than Africa, don’t you think. Cheaper as they would not have to buy them. Then ship them over to the US.
Actually, it is well known that the vulnerable that were close were the ones enslaved. Until transatlantic travel all slaves were taken nearby. snip...snip... "
ccording to that National Geographic article titled “21st Century Slaves“:

There are an estimated 27 million men, women, and children in the world who are enslaved — physically confined or restrained and forced to work, or controlled through violence, or in some way treated as property.
Therefore, there are more slaves today than were seized from Africa in four centuries of the trans-Atlantic slave trade [11 million total, and about 450,000, or about 4% of the total, who were brought to the United States]. The modern commerce in humans rivals illegal drug trafficking in its global reach—and in the destruction of lives.
MP: Good question, Dr. Sowell — where is the moral indignation about that interesting fact??

and Trump is trying to fix what your party fed. There is a moral issue in play at this time...right now, and only Trump and his people are trying to fix the mess Biden and his cronies fed.

 
Actually, it is well known that the vulnerable that were close were the ones enslaved. Until transatlantic travel all slaves were taken nearby. snip...snip... "
ccording to that National Geographic article titled “21st Century Slaves“:


MP: Good question, Dr. Sowell — where is the moral indignation about that interesting fact??

and Trump is trying to fix what your party fed. There is a moral issue in play at this time...right now, and only Trump and his people are trying to fix the mess Biden and his cronies fed.

It’s amazing why y’all twist yourselves into knots deflecting the roll the US played in slavery in the the US. You and the other racists in this forum have absolutely no say in that. No one is denying slavery worldwide. I live in the US. My main concern is slavery in the US where my ancestors were enslaved. Then went through Jim Crow.
 
It’s amazing why y’all twist yourselves into knots deflecting the roll the US played in slavery in the the US. You and the other racists in this forum have absolutely no say in that. No one is denying slavery worldwide. I live in the US. My main concern is slavery in the US where my ancestors were enslaved. Then went through Jim Crow.
Are you angling for reparations for bni?
 
Well. You are the most racist individual in this forum. You should be ashamed and banned from this site with the quickness.
Why? Because he supported his position with data that you personally don't approve of or disagree with?

A very smart Notre Dame law professor chair said that "You don't have the right not to be offended".
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT