***Official SF Bay Area Sightings/General Thread***

Originally Posted by B_Cyrus

I am sorry, but I disagree. America was the first nation ever to implement a system of slavery based on race. There were not any ideologies of racism in Greece. Greek slaves were of every colour, and were treated the same, as Greek slaves were a mix of black, brown, white, and every other colour under the sun. Look at the time period from 1600 to late 1700 and tell me that America, in less than 100 years, did not start racism. Don't confuse discrimination with racism.

Jews are not a race. Jews are built up of many nationalities. Israel is just a religious state, much like Iran, but Israel makes a bigger deal about it as the "nation given to us for our religion." I don't want to get into that issue, as it is too long.

You're main problem is that you didn't specifically say the difference between racism and discrimination; there is a similarity and it needs to be noted.

Look at Latin American and the slavery of the Indian population (Mayan, Aztecs etc) were all brought into slavery by the Spanish conquistadors and later the Spanish governments. Direct slavery because of a race. And for the Jewish side I don't think Jews are a race, I'm just pointing out that some people think they are, and they could make that argument.

Originally Posted by cyberkaa

I like to think of it as a variety show.
We've got a number of segments:
-Briangle's Diary
-Miles Tells it Like it Isn't
-Picture of the Day hosted by DJ Ramin
-Cool Cars with Albee
-Video Interlude with Rick Devious
-And colorful quips from mtnDave, Frank the Tank, Newbie, Wes, Billy Ray Cyrus, and Yours Truly
-With guest commentary/drug-induced analysis by Matt Hinezz

Originally Posted by B_Cyrus

I am sorry, but I disagree. America was the first nation ever to implement a system of slavery based on race. There were not any ideologies of racism in Greece. Greek slaves were of every colour, and were treated the same, as Greek slaves were a mix of black, brown, white, and every other colour under the sun. Look at the time period from 1600 to late 1700 and tell me that America, in less than 100 years, did not start racism. Don't confuse discrimination with racism.

Jews are not a race. Jews are built up of many nationalities. Israel is just a religious state, much like Iran, but Israel makes a bigger deal about it as the "nation given to us for our religion." I don't want to get into that issue, as it is too long.

I don't agree with that. During the colonial days, slaves were being exported from Africa. Americans were not the only ones, nor were they the first to import African slaves.

Originally Posted by 323ci newbie

You're main problem is that you didn't specifically say the difference between racism and discrimination; there is a similarity and it needs to be noted.

Look at Latin American and the slavery of the Indian population (Mayan, Aztecs etc) were all brought into slavery by the Spanish conquistadors and later the Spanish governments. Direct slavery because of a race. And for the Jewish side I don't think Jews are a race, I'm just pointing out that some people think they are, and they could make that argument.

That was not direct slavery because of race. They were forced into slavery after being conquered. If they were white, then they would have been white slaves. The slavery in America had direct racial roots. Example, 1680, laws made so negros can not have weapons. 1681, law forbidding emancipation of any Negro or mulatto unless the owner paid for his transportation outside Virginia within six months of setting the slave free. 1691, black indentured servants being forced past their indentured servitude against their will. Evidence that this never happened to white indentured servants. 1704, free Negroes who owned slaves, the Virginia legislature decreed that no Negro, mulatto, or Indian could purchase any Christian servant, except of their own complexion, as slaves. Negroes were forbidden to purchase any white Christian servant. See the trend here? This was not the case in any of the ancients, or years previous.

Kyle, they can make any argument they want but race is a social construct that is clearly defined.

Originally Posted by Wes

I don't agree with that. During the colonial days, slaves were being exported from Africa. Americans were not the only ones, nor were they the first to import African slaves.

true, the atlantic slave trade was very large. Those other than the American colonists were not the ones to turn the idea of colour and slavery into one idea. Are you familiar with the temperance or abolitionist movements? John Brown? Grimke Sisters? People who tried to turn this idea away before the start of the civil war?

Originally Posted by B_Cyrus

funny, I wrote about that in one of my finals today. Without slavery, the American system of economics and agriculture would not exist, Rome wouldn't have existed, Greece would never have been the empire it was, women wouldn't have rights today, and technology as a whole around the world would never have progressed. Without slaves, most of America could still be Mexican or French/Spanish. Slavery made such a large impact in the world that everything would be different.

The fun difference is America made slavery racist(Maryland, New York, Virginia, Georgia, and South Carolina mostly). America invented modern day racism.

I hear this argument a lot by bible thumpers attempting to justify that the slavery in the bible was somehow moral and that slavery was a neutral institution until America got a hold of it and turned it ugly.

I think that's horsesh

Originally Posted by cyberkaa

I'm guessing a Costco-sized can of strawberry you jelly.

Originally Posted by Devious21

I hear this argument a lot by bible thumpers attempting to justify that the slavery in the bible was somehow moral and that slavery was a neutral institution until America got a hold of it and turned it ugly.

I think that's horsesh

Seeing as slaves were not taught how to read or given religion after slave owners realized that slaves had thoughts of their own and started to see that slavery was not moral in the bible, that would be silly.

If you are all in to discuss, I will argue this for days. I just finished a 4 month research paper on this.

:/

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Bimmer App

I think we aren't on the same page when it comes to defining racism. You cannot compare America to a country like Greece. When Greece had slavery, it was already a long-established nation with many people of different origins. When the British came to the Americas, they were all the same type of people and they were all on the same boat (figuratively and literally). No way would they have enslaved their own people. Look at the Europeans who colonized the West Indies and South America. They were in a similar situation. They brought over African slaves because they were the hot item at the time. Is that racist? I don't think so. It was all business.

And no, I'm not familiar with any of those things that you mentioned. My knowledge of American history is not that great. Enlighten me.

Originally Posted by B_Cyrus

Seeing as slaves were not taught how to read or given religion after slave owners realized that slaves had thoughts of their own and started to see that slavery was not moral in the bible, that would be silly.

If you are all in to discuss, I will argue this for days. I just finished a 4 month research paper on this.

When you say "America made slavery racist", I could see your justification for saying that being that we were the first to pass laws based on race. That's a claim that's either objectively true or objectively false. If it's true then, I'd have to agree that America was the first to make slavery legal based on race.

If you implying that all slavery before us was strictly business and no race ever took another race that they considered inferior, as slaves, I'm sure someone can come up with an example to the contrary.

For the claim "America invented modern day racism", you'd have to define what "modern day racism" is and explain how it differs from traditional racism.

lol Nick is furiously typing away right now

Originally Posted by Wes

lol Nick is furiously typing away right now

Give me a break, I was taking a shower lol. My Japanese roommate was crying about "mirring his parentu" or something so I wanted to leave the room for a bit.

Originally Posted by Wes

I think we aren't on the same page when it comes to defining racism. You cannot compare America to a country like Greece. When Greece had slavery, it was already a long-established nation with many people of different origins. When the British came to the Americas, they were all the same type of people and they were all on the same boat (figuratively and literally). No way would they have enslaved their own people. Look at the Europeans who colonized the West Indies and South America. They were in a similar situation. They brought over African slaves because they were the hot item at the time. Is that racist? I don't think so. It was all business.

And no, I'm not familiar with any of those things that you mentioned. My knowledge of American history is not that great. Enlighten me.

Originally Posted by Devious21

When you say "America made slavery racist", I could see your justification for saying that being that we were the first to pass laws based on race. That's a claim that's either objectively true or objectively false. If it's true then, I'd have to agree that America was the first to make slavery legal based on race.

If you implying that all slavery before us was strictly business and no race ever took another race that they considered inferior, as slaves, I'm sure someone can come up with an example to the contrary.

For the claim "America invented modern day racism", you'd have to define what "modern day racism" is and explain how it differs from traditional racism.

You both bring up really great points, and I really hope Kyle doesn't take my retorts as arrogance or insulting to his education. Kyle, in all seriousness, is the real expert on American history as that is his focus and mine is more ancient greek history/European history. I just spent a few months in research, so I feel that I have some credible input to give forward. With an issue such as racism, which both Wes and Rick bring up, you need that clear definition.

It's hard to say that racism has never existed before this time, which I would agree with would be false. Maybe I was quick to say so, as there definitely were cases of inferiority. In saying this, I can say with much confidence that institutional racial slavery did not exist until the time of American colonization.

You were lucky to get that 89.6

[bimmer app/galaxy s3]

Originally Posted by B_Cyrus

That was not direct slavery because of race. They were forced into slavery after being conquered. If they were white, then they would have been white slaves. The slavery in America had direct racial roots. Example, 1680, laws made so negros can not have weapons. 1681, law forbidding emancipation of any Negro or mulatto unless the owner paid for his transportation outside Virginia within six months of setting the slave free. 1691, black indentured servants being forced past their indentured servitude against their will. Evidence that this never happened to white indentured servants. 1704, free Negroes who owned slaves, the Virginia legislature decreed that no Negro, mulatto, or Indian could purchase any Christian servant, except of their own complexion, as slaves. Negroes were forbidden to purchase any white Christian servant. See the trend here? This was not the case in any of the ancients, or years previous.

Kyle, they can make any argument they want but race is a social construct that is clearly defined.

true, the atlantic slave trade was very large. Those other than the American colonists were not the ones to turn the idea of colour and slavery into one idea. Are you familiar with the temperance or abolitionist movements? John Brown? Grimke Sisters? People who tried to turn this idea away before the start of the civil war?

OK, so then neither were the African slaves. Do you know who were the first people to use African slaves? Africans. And that was not direct slavery because of race, that was just plain old slavery.
You can't claim that if the Indians in South America were white they would still be slaves..there is no way to know that unless there was a specific diary note or other firsthand source. The point I was trying to make was that American's were not the first country to do slavery specifically by race. I think the US picked up on that idea of using committing slavery based only on race really fast and didn't look back.

Originally Posted by XKxRome0ox

You were lucky to get that 89.6

[bimmer app/galaxy s3]

Why? Historians are closet psychologists who love to debate interpretations of facts.

Originally Posted by 323ci newbie

OK, so then neither were the African slaves. Do you know who were the first people to use African slaves? Africans. And that was not direct slavery because of race, that was just plain old slavery.
You can't claim that if the Indians in South America were white they would still be slaves..there is no way to know that unless there was a specific diary note or other firsthand source. The point I was trying to make was that American's were not the first country to do slavery specifically by race. I think the US picked up on that idea of using committing slavery based only on race really fast and didn't look back.

I agree, African slaves were first used by Africans. Europeans who came over to the Americas had slaves from many nations, which shows slavery as not institutionalized based on race in Europe. I am not seeing the connection between your example and how Americans were not the first to specifically turn slavery into racism in their slaves based economy.

Originally Posted by Wes

And no, I'm not familiar with any of those things that you mentioned. My knowledge of American history is not that great. Enlighten me.

We were hanging out with the British, then said "f off King George, you blow" then we had a minor fight...and for the rest of time we've been taking ass and kicking names

Originally Posted by Wes

lol Nick is furiously typing away right now

Originally Posted by B_Cyrus

Why? Historians are closet psychologists who love to debate interpretations of facts.

This is really true

Originally Posted by B_Cyrus

That was not direct slavery because of race. They were forced into slavery after being conquered. If they were white, then they would have been white slaves. The slavery in America had direct racial roots. Example, 1680, laws made so negros can not have weapons. ...

So, if they had conquered whites, they would have had white slaves. But we had direct slavery because of race? Like it's implying America passed laws on Africans being slaves and THEN chose to enslave them? If dutch were selling Chinese or a mix of Chinese and Black would it still have been a decision based on race?

America purchased slaves which were black and then passed laws limiting what rights they could have to keep them enslaved. According to this , they purchased them as early as 1619. About 60 years before those laws you mentioned.

What I'm getting at is assuming motivation. How do you prove that racism was the motivation for buying black slaves and that racism didn't develop because our slaves were all black and slaves were not seen as equal?