A Confederacy of Dunces?

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

No need for caps, I hear you loud and clear.

The southern states were (and are) infected with racist ideas, formed over a long period of time.

One could argue they didn't know any better. If one is raised with black slaves, who are only allowed to and therefor only able to do simple tasks and nod at the boss, it's not a big surprise they are considered inferior. If you are born into slavery, it's not a big surprise you actually feel inferior.

That does

not

mean their society was

based

on having black slaves, as I pointed out.

The same is the case for the Hitler Jugend. They were raised with a certain idea and I do not blame them for believing what they were told. This is not the case for the nutjobs who started it all.

---

The society that developed into the Confederate States of America was based on African slavery, because they were Africans, and because they considered it was okay for Africans, and only Africans, to be slaves, because Africans were inferior to Caucasians. This is what they said in their own words. How can you say that their society wasn't based on this when they say it was themselves?

[Dresden]

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

I am fairly convinced slavers felt they weren't doing anything wrong.

---

I fail to understand why you can't see that regardless of that which they'd convinced themselves, they were in fact doing something wrong.  Just because the something wrong they were doing was systemically considered acceptable doesn't make it all right.

...Dres

[Kwakkelde Kwak]

They felt that way, because from the moment they were born, they saw blacks as slaves, not whites or reds. So they certainly did see it as a part of their culture/society/heritage. Since the southern life was so dependant on the (black) slavery, it was percieved as a vital part, a cornerstone of their society.

I have a feeling your "based" and my "based" aren't the same. Maybe "originated" is the better word for what I'm trying to explain. What I am saying is that the black slavery didn't start because the whites saw them as inferior. White and red slaves were harder to keep and not as readily available at a certain point.

A crucial factor here is malaria, killing a lot of caucasians and indians, but not Africans.

[Kwakkelde Kwak]

This has got nothing to do with convincing oneself. This is how one truly feels.

People can't be held responsible for something they didn't know was wrong, as long as they couldn't know it was wrong.

For the victims that doesn't make a difference, but as you said so yourself, it's about the ideology, not the "amount" of suffering.

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

---

Dresden wrote:

Oh, I get it... it isn't as bad to enslave, torture and kill people to make a buck, as it is to do it just because you just feel like it... right?

...Dres

---

No you do not get it at all.

I am fairly convinced slavers felt they weren't doing anything wrong. It was all in the open. Nothing to be embarrased about.

Why do you think the death camps were all hidden from the get go and in the end for the better part destroyed? The nazis knew very well what they were doing was wrong in the mind of any sane person. Why do you think Aktion T4 was terminated the second it came into the public eye?

---

The slaveowners of the Confederate States of America felt what they were doing was right, but they knew significant numbers of people in the United States thought it was wrong. It had been like this for the entire history of the United States as a nation. In the leadup to the American Civil War Northern politicians took steps, not to end slavery in the South, but to prevent its becoming established in the new territories of the West. This was one of the major bones of contention that led to thoughts of secession in the South.

[Dresden]

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

This has got nothing to do with convincing oneself. This is how one truly feels.

People can't be held responsible for something they didn't

know

was wrong, as long as they couldn't know it was wrong.

For the victims that doesn't make a difference, but as you said so yourself, it's about the ideology, not the "amount" of suffering.

---

I see.  In other words, the entirety of southern white slave owners are entirely innocent of the atrocities they've committed.  Lovely.

...Dres

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

They felt that way, because from the moment they were born, they saw blacks as slaves, not whites or reds. So they certainly did see it as a part of their culture/society/heritage. Since the southern life was so dependant on the (black) slavery, it was percieved as a vital part, a cornerstone of their society.

I have a feeling your "based" and my "based" aren't the same. Maybe "originated" is the better word for what I'm trying to explain. What I am saying is that the black slavery didn't

start

because the whites saw them as inferior. White and red slaves were harder to keep and not as readily available at a certain point.

A crucial factor here is malaria, killing a lot of caucasians and indians, but not Africans.

---

The master/slave relationship is based on the concept that the slave is inferior to the master. If whites didn't see blacks as inferior, why were they used as slaves? Granted, the blacks weren't the only group seen as inferior, but they certainly were seen that way.

The Nazis weren't the first group to commit genocide - for instance, the Ottoman Turks systematically killed off all the Armenians they could get their hands on in 1915. Does that mean that Nazi Germany wasn't "based" on killing Jews?

[Kwakkelde Kwak]

---

Dresden wrote:

I see.  In other words, the entirety of southern white slave owners are entirely innocent of the atrocities they've committed.  Lovely.

---

Again, no....

...but there are mitigating factors.

[Kwakkelde Kwak]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

The slaveowners of the Confederate States of America felt what they were doing was right,

but they knew significant numbers of people in the United States thought it was wrong.

It had been like this for the entire history of the United States as a nation. In the leadup to the American Civil War Northern politicians took steps,

not

to end slavery in the

South

, but to prevent its becoming established in the new territories of the West. This was one of the major bones of contention that led to thoughts of secession in the South.

---

This is very relevant in my discussion with Dres. I wouldn't say the Southerners couldn't know they were "wrong". They had the entire North to point out there were other beliefs.

---

The master/slave relationship is based on the concept that the slave is inferior to the master. If whites didn't see blacks as inferior, why were they used as slaves? Granted, the blacks weren't the

only

group seen as inferior, but they certainly were seen that way.

---

They did see the blacks as inferior, I never stated otherwise.

---

The Nazis weren't the first group to commit genocide - for instance, the Ottoman Turks systematically killed off all the Armenians they could get their hands on in 1915. Does that mean that Nazi Germany wasn't "based" on killing Jews?

---

I don't see what you are trying to say. There have been numerous accounts of genocide in the 20th century alone.(although never as systematic as in nazi Germany). The Jews were held responsible for the Versailles treaty and for the economic situation in the 1920's and '30s. Nazi ideology was based (among other things) on "evacuating" the Jews for this reason, they were supposedly to blame for everything that was wrong with Germany.

[Dresden]

Well this has been fun, but I have to run for a while. I'll be busy celebrating the fact that I can finally marry my partner of over fourteen years.

...Dres

[Kwakkelde Kwak]

congrats!

EDIT..ah now I see the other thread, well maybe "the land of the free" will have some actual freedom in the future then, a good step into that direction...

[Dresden]

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

congrats!

EDIT..ah now I see the other thread, well maybe "the land of the free" will have some actual freedom in the future then, a good step into that direction...

---

Thanks Kwak.

...Dres

[Kate McLaglen]

Second Life / LL is a business first.  This is an important fact in this discussion.  Linden Labs will or will not do things based on profitability.  The changes in policy for the sale and/or display of the confederate flag has, thus far, been done at business levels.  If LL decides it is in their best interest to remove the confederate flag for SL, they will do so.   Period.   No discussion needed.  Many assume these decisions are based on social consciousness, but I believe they are profit driven.  Less people shopping, less money. 

If 1st Life has taught me anything, it has taught me that business responds to what matters, money.

 

My opinion on this?  I think that if a symbol from the past represents victimizing a group of people, it should not be glorified.  I do not expect others to live by my rules and values, but I do expect others to try to be decent to each other.  Many times an old symbol, that represents pain to many, needs only to go into a museum to remind us of our folly not on display to be honoured.

[BobbyGeorge]

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Dresden wrote:

Well this has been fun, but I have to run for a while. I'll be busy celebrating the fact that I can finally marry my partner of over fourteen years.

...Dres

---

You go, Guys!

[Perrie Juran]

 

 

(I was unable to confirm the source of this image or I'd have credited it.)

[Drake1 Nightfire]

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

How many have to die before you think that slavery wasn't as bad a thenazies?  This type of evil is evil, regardless of the number who actually died.. 

---

If you read back a bit, you will see that I do not consider the amount of casualties any kind of benchmark. That amount is not measurable anyway.

What sets slavers apart from nazis, is the fact that slavers acted on economical basis, they swapped whites for reds just as easily as the reds for blacks. Their view on the value of human life is not one I share, but it's not as horrible as blaming an entire group for something they didn't cause, then exterminating them altogether.

In the slaver's mind it is their right to prosper on the loss of others. In the mind of a nazi,

it's fine to commit genocide without any valid reason.

---

That is exactly the point people are trying to make. In many minds the people waving the confederate flag would like nothing more than to see blacks wiped off the face of the earth, or removed from the US at the least. Which makes them just as bad if not worse than the Nazis as they are spouting about racial purity when they aren't pure themselves.

[Drake1 Nightfire]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

 

(I was unable to confirm the source of this image or I'd have credited it.)

---

I am stealing that and posting it on Facebook and making it my background. *YOINK*

[Drake1 Nightfire]

---

Dresden wrote:

Well this has been fun, but I have to run for a while. I'll be busy celebrating the fact that I can finally marry my partner of over fourteen years.

...Dres

---

/me makes a mental note to send a nice gift to Dres...

My youngest daughter is extremely proud to have been born on the day the very first same sex couple was allowed to legally marry in the US.

[DejaHo]

---

Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

How many have to die before you think that slavery wasn't as bad athenazies?  This type of evil is evil, regardless of the number who actually died.. 

---

If you read back a bit, you will see that I do not consider the amount of casualties any kind of benchmark. That amount is not measurable anyway.

What sets slavers apart from nazis, is the fact that slavers acted on economical basis, they swapped whites for reds just as easily as the reds for blacks. Their view on the value of human life is not one I share, but it's not as horrible as blaming an entire group for something they didn't cause, then exterminating them altogether.

In the slaver's mind it is their right to prosper on the loss of others. In the mind of a nazi,

it's fine to commit genocide without any valid reason.

---

That is exactly the point people are trying to make.

In many minds the people waving the confederate flag would like nothing more than to see blacks wiped off the face of the earth,

or removed from the US at the least. Which makes them just as bad if not worse than the Nazis as they are spouting about racial purity when they aren't pure themselves.

---

You have no reference for this statement.  NONE.  Again you interject statements that have zero validity.  Yes, the US has neo-nazi's running around playing their white supremacy games while waving the confederate flag, but it is NOT indicative of every southerner; whether they have a flag or not.  Again, like I wrote to Theresa, you are content in your ignorance, Drake1. 

Imo, this is your third fail in this thread.   Try reading a book.  

PS Stick your 'white' guilt up your arse, It doesn't play well to blacks OR whites.

 

 

[Drake1 Nightfire]

---

DejaHo wrote:

---

Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

How many have to die before you think that slavery wasn't as badathenazies?  This type of evil is evil, regardless of the number who actually died.. 

---

If you read back a bit, you will see that I do not consider the amount of casualties any kind of benchmark. That amount is not measurable anyway.

What sets slavers apart from nazis, is the fact that slavers acted on economical basis, they swapped whites for reds just as easily as the reds for blacks. Their view on the value of human life is not one I share, but it's not as horrible as blaming an entire group for something they didn't cause, then exterminating them altogether.

In the slaver's mind it is their right to prosper on the loss of others. In the mind of a nazi,

it's fine to commit genocide without any valid reason.

---

That is exactly the point people are trying to make.

In many minds the people waving the confederate flag would like nothing more than to see blacks wiped off the face of the earth,

or removed from the US at the least. Which makes them just as bad if not worse than the Nazis as they are spouting about racial purity when they aren't pure themselves.

---

You have no reference for this statement.  NONE.  Again you interject statements that have zero validity.  Yes, the US has neo-nazi's running around playing their white supremacy games while waving the confederate flag, but it is NOT indicative of every southerner; whether they have a flag or not.  Again, like I wrote to Theresa, you are content in your ignorance, Drake1. 

Imo, this is your third fail in this thread.

  Try reading a book.  

PS Stick your 'white' guilt up your arse, It doesn't play well to blacks OR whites.

 

 

---

And again, you have yet to reply with anything coming close to a reply to what i actually said.

I said many people, not all. It isn't just neo-nazi's that want blacks wiped out.. many southerners believe this country would be 1000 times better without them.

I don't have white guilt. My family came over on the Mayflower and have never owned slaves. I just don't think anyone is better based on what color their skin is.

Lets look at what you call my THREE FAILS..

1. comparing the fact you can buy Nazi emblazoned items on Amazon but not Confederate flag items. Well, if they are ok with banning a flag why not the Nazi symbol? Which was my point, but you are too dense to get it.
2. I suppose i should have said "Major black characters in the Dukes of Hazzard." My bad.. a few bit parts is hardly encompassing.
3. I know many people that live in the south, and many more are on various sites all wanting the same thing. Apparently you know every single person from the south and they all love black people.

When the majority of idiots are on the 6 o'clock news spouting off about blacks being the problem with this country. People start believing the majority of southerners think this way. Perhaps you should look at the real problem and keep the rednecks off the news.

 

[Venus Petrov]

---

Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

I said many people, not all. It isn't just neo-nazi's that want blacks wiped out..

many southerners believe this country would be 1000 times better without them.

If by 'many' you mean even 50.1% you would be wrong.  One thousand times better?  No.  Do you write from the perspective of someone raised in the South? Living in the South?   The South of 2015 is not the South of 1915 or even 1995.  Don't let your hyperbole get the better of you.

[irihapeti]

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

---

Dresden wrote:

It's not the level of atrocities committed, but the incredibly similar, hate-fueled, supremacist ideology of both movements which are legitimately comparable.  Just because one people had it worse than the other, doesn't make the ideology behind such atrocities of either level any more or less atrocious.

...Dres

---

You completely miss my point, as do

irihapeti and Theresa apparently. If we're talking sheer numbers, many more people were and are affected by racism and slavery than there are by genocide. Unfortunately, racism is widely spread throughout history and throughout the world, and (again unfortunately) can be considered quite normal. It's embedded in human nature, based on a healthy fear of the unknown.

It is a big leap from "we are not equal" to "

you are a pest to society

and you need to be exterminated"

Certainly

not

the same ideology.

---

i just jump back in here bc you mention me

i think that where we at cross purposes is that you are addressing the outcomes of the two situations and I am more addressing the philosophical basis that lead to these outcomes

+

i put another way. Where does evil begin?

if you had a choice: be enslaved until you die, or die now, which would you choose? Or if view this as a 3rd-party which would be the lesser of the two evils?

faced with this most people I think would choose to live, and most 3rd-parties would agree with this choice

the person tho is not choosing to be enslaved when they do this. They are choosing to not die. Which is pretty understandable

however, nobody ever gets, or ever got this choice in the two situations. The offer of death is never given by the slaver. The offer of life is never given by the genocider

there is no choice for the objects of their intentions. Both these evils begin with the removal of choice

 

 

[irihapeti]

---

Dresden wrote:

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

I am fairly convinced slavers felt they weren't doing anything wrong.

---

I fail to understand why you can't see that regardless of that which they'd convinced themselves, they

were

in fact doing something wrong.  Just because the something wrong they were doing was systemically considered acceptable doesn't make it all right.

...Dres

---

^^ that ^^

[irihapeti]

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

---

Unfortunately, racism is widely spread throughout history and throughout the world, and (again unfortunately) can be considered quite normal. It's embedded in human nature, based on a healthy fear of the unknown.

 

---

i address this one separately bc I think is a complete misunderstanding of human nature as it relates to fear on the larger societal level

we fear the other tribe, one we have not previously met, bc of what they might be able to do us

We dont fear them bc of what is unknown, we fear them bc of what is known to us based on our past experience with other groups we have encountered

we dont fear the unknown, we just go carefully

racism doesnt come out of fear of the unknown. It comes out of fear of the known