on the question: should Georgia apologize for slavery

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:24 pm

[quote="Makh";p="727875"][quote="rkitect";p="727791"][quote="Makh";p="727751"]
People were going in USA to live as free men. They left their country for that. If you were not a slaveowner, then why you let the others own slaves? You called yourself the land of the free, then why you authorized them to own slaves at the very beginning?[/quote]
A majority of these people were not coming into the US to be free, but instead were being shipped in for the specific purpose of being sold into slavery. A business that I do not condone or ever wish to see again in the USA.[/quote]
Yes, but that does not answer my question. All people say slaveowners were a minority and isolated cases, then why you did not arrest them, or why you let them own slaves? Why Thomas Jefferson do not say anything about slavery in the constitution?

[quote="rkitect";p="727791"]What exactly have I done? I'd be willing to bet that my maturity level is much higher than a majority of the people demanding an apology. The problem here is that most of these people feel they deserve an apology because slavery is what is currently keeping them from making 3 digit salaries and living in multi-million dollar homes. They feel they have been wronged because of this event that happened 150 years ago. An apology would only lead to an outcry for payment of reparations. Don't believe me? It's already happened. Also, to bring things closer to home they are now wanting a national apology for slavery. That's right, now California and Hawaii apparently have to be sorry for slavery as well. Give a mouse a cookie...[/quote]
Why are you against this initiative? Why are you against apologies for your own citizen?

[quote="spikegirl7";p="727830"]OH! Let's not forget that racism is the fault of American slave owners! Never mind that there were white slaves in this country. Don't mind that racism has been around for longer than living memory (Jews in Egypt anyone?). And of course the fact that race wasn't a motivating factor in slavery (other than how they would stand out in a mostly-white crowd) should never be considered.[/quote]
I was not aware of white slaves in USA. If Slavery, of white or black people, seems to be such an aberration to you, how do you explain, to a foreigner like me, that American people let such things happen during so many years?[/quote]

Uh. Russia ended slavery (aka serfdom) just 2 years before the Emancipation Proclamation. And I don't find stories of the sex slave trade about the US. Get off your high horse a bit.

Deacon · Post by **Deacon** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:43 pm

Please, people, let's avoid the massive quoting for one-line replies. Not only is it annoying and unhelpful to read, but it unnecessarily takes up a bunch of extra space in the database.

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:55 pm

[quote="Deacon";p="727932"]Please, people, let's avoid the massive quoting for one-line replies. Not only is it annoying and unhelpful to read, but it unnecessarily takes up a bunch of extra space in the database.[/quote]

ok

spikegirl7 · Post by **spikegirl7** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:28 pm

[quote="Makh";p="727875"]I was not aware of white slaves in USA. If Slavery, of white or black people, seems to be such an aberration to you, how do you explain, to a foreigner like me, that American people let such things happen during so many years?[/quote]

why did Americans let slavery exist?

Because in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, that was the norm. Slavery existed all around the world at that time, including in a whole lot of civilized countries. They took advantage of an existing institution in order to help grow a fledgling economy that in parts was heavily based in agriculture. I'm not going to condemn them because they did it, because it was the norm then and it was necessary. Nor am I going to condemn England, France, or any of the other great powers of the world who held slaves for around that time, and quite frankly had slavery for longer than the US.

Why are you against this initiative? Why are you against apologies for your own citizen?

because there is no living person who has been hurt by slavery in this country. Because groups like the NAACP would use it to demand money from the government. Because I don't believe it stems from a sense of hurt but a desire to one-up the government and white people in general. Because slavery was the social norm and not some historical monstrosity. Because there is no other country (to my knowledge) that has apologized for having slaves in the past. Because I believe that there have been worse things in this country than slavery. Before I apologize for slavery I'm gonna apologize for the de facto slavery of sharecropping.

Yes, but that does not answer my question. All people say slaveowners were a minority and isolated cases, then why you did not arrest them, or why you let them own slaves? Why Thomas Jefferson do not say anything about slavery in the constitution?

You could ask the same of a number of nations at the time. If you ask that question in any other country that owned slaves at the time though they'll give you a funny look and think you're daft. This is the only country where we would give it an audience.

Slavery was an established practice at the time. It was what was normal at the time. It wasn't thought of the way it is today.

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:50 pm

They took advantage of an existing institution in order to help grow a fledgling economy that in parts was heavily based in agriculture. I'm not going to condemn them because they did it, because it was the norm then and it was necessary.

What about condemning them for hypocrites, because what they proposed to stand for could not have allowed slavery if they stood for it? You say" Slavery was an established practice at the time. It was what was normal at the time. It wasn't thought of the way it is today", and while that is very much true, ours is the only nation for whom slavery ran counter to just about everything we were supposed to stand for.

because there is no living person who has been hurt by slavery in this country.

I'm not sure if that's entirely true. Directly, sure, but people are still hurt by slavery, and by the lingering racism that slavery helped entrench and sanctify. Directly, no one is hurt by slavery, because the slaves and slave owners are all dead and gone for generations, now, and it's touch still lingers.

Because slavery was the social norm and not some historical monstrosity.

What, it can't be both? Just because everyone was doing it, all that means is everyone was doing something horrible.

Still. Makh: why not? Because an apology is, in this case, useless: anyone it'd mean something for, the people directly effected by slavery, the slaves, are all dead and buried; and anyone alive is in no position to apologize (since you can't really apologize for the actions of someone else!) ... it's useless and foolish. An empty gesture.

Deacon · Post by **Deacon** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:09 pm

[quote="StruckingFuggle";p="728005"]What about condemning them for hypocrites, because what they proposed to stand for could not have allowed slavery if they stood for it?[/quote]
Your interpretation of their words made through the lens of modern societal context isn't really a fair judgment nor an accurate representation of society at the time. If society 200 years from now comes to view all animals as on an equal level with humans, they will claim that you're a hypocrite for allowing the enslavement of innocent animals for the amusement of humans, you hypocrite. And it would be at least as ridiculous an accusation.

rkitect · Post by **rkitect** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:35 pm

[quote="StruckingFuggle";p="728005"] Directly, sure, but people are still hurt by slavery, and by the lingering racism that slavery helped entrench and sanctify. Directly, no one is hurt by slavery, because the slaves and slave owners are all dead and gone for generations, now, and it's touch still lingers. [/quote]

I'm not really sure what to say to this. Mainly because I have not seen any evidence of the effects of slavery on people today. To be honest, the racism that I see alive today is not carried on by whites (with the obvious exceptions that the average American frowns upon), but instead blacks. How can slavery's touch still linger when there are programs to help everyone but an average white male in this country get along in life? Looked into college scholarships recently? Government fundings for minority businesses? We're doing everything we can to help these people but they don't want to do the work. Almost to the point where the prejudice is against ourselves! They want the rewards without the labor!

Now I may just be ignorant to these effects of slavery that still linger today, so please (and don't feel this is condescending, I want to know where I'm wrong) point out these effects that are still around.

I should say that I don't feel this way about all blacks. If you want to know from where and why I am forming these ideas feel free to tune into these talk shows that are painting the picture in the black community's mind that white people need to apologize for what we have done to their society. (http://www.wclk.com)

I have had it ingrained in me since I was very young that Racism is wrong and have striven to make friends in all ethnicities and to not judge without knowing. How can I help end something that the other party doesn't want to end because it gives them the advantage?

Makh · Post by **Makh** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 8:29 pm

[quote="Deacon";p="727925"]Why are you for it? What do you believe it will accomplish? Why are you so adamantly insistent that it be done? To me, there doesn't seem to be any legitimate reason for it.[/quote]
My knowledge about whites and black relations of USA is limited. What I think of it, is not very important because I do not live there and I will not have to take this decision. You, Deacon, you have good grasp of American society, you can explain to me, with a more solid argumentation then mine, why the people in this thread, seem to be so anti apoligies?

All people say slaveowners were a minority and isolated cases, then why you did not arrest them, or why you let them own slaves?

Eventually, less than 100 years after independence was declared and a fledgling nation began to fight for their right to exist, society decided that slavery wasn't cool, so they did exactly what you said. In fact, 360,000 people, almost all white, died to end it and preserve the Union, while an additional 275,200 were wounded for the cause.

I am aware of the sacrifice the American people did to preserve their country. However, I remember some people were saying that civil war not about slavery RLF forum. If you aks me, I would say Northerners fought it to preserve the unity of USA and the Southerners fought it to preserve the new constitutional republic.

[quote="Bigity";p="727927"]Uh. Russia ended slavery (aka serfdom) just 2 years before the Emancipation Proclamation.[/quote]
Serfdom, as you call it, was in Imperial Russia, a tyrannical dictatorship ruled by one very autocratic leader since Tsarina Katerina II. How can you simply compare USA with Imperial Russia at the same time? Russia never claimed to be the land of the free or champion of democracy.

[quote="spikegirl7";p="728001"]why did Americans let slavery exist?

Because in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, that was the norm. Slavery existed all around the world at that time, including in a whole lot of civilized countries. They took advantage of an existing institution in order to help grow a fledgling economy that in parts was heavily based in agriculture. I'm not going to condemn them because they did it, because it was the norm then and it was necessary. Nor am I going to condemn England, France, or any of the other great powers of the world who held slaves for around that time, and quite frankly had slavery for longer than the US.[/quote]
It was not the norm. Most advanced European powers abolished slavery before or during the Napoleonic wars. Most of the northern states of USA (those in new England) had no slave since 1770.

[quote="StruckingFuggle";p="728005"]Still. Makh: why not? Because an apology is, in this case, useless: anyone it'd mean something for, the people directly effected by slavery, the slaves, are all dead and buried; and anyone alive is in no position to apologize (since you can't really apologize for the actions of someone else!) ... it's useless and foolish. An empty gesture.[/quote]
If it is foolish, why the Armenian are asking Turkey to apologize for what they have done more than 90 years ago?

StruckingFuggle · Post by **StruckingFuggle** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 8:32 pm

If it is foolish, why the Armenian are asking Turkey to apologize for what they have done more than 90 years ago?

The seeming conclusion here would be that the Armenians are engaging in a foolish pursuit, and their time and energy would be better spent elsewhere.

Deacon · Post by **Deacon** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 8:56 pm

[quote="Makh";p="728055"]You, Deacon, you have good grasp of American society, you can explain to me, with a more solid argumentation then mine, why the people in this thread, seem to be so anti apoligies?[/quote]
I don't know how it can be explained any further or with any more clarity. Regardless, IMHO it should be up to those demanding an apology to communicate why they believe it is necessary.

However, I remember some people were saying that civil war not about slavery RLF forum. If you aks me, I would say Northerners fought it to preserve the unity of USA and the Southerners fought it to preserve the new constitutional republic.

It depends on who you ask, exactly, but it's clear that the critical point of contention was the abolition of slavery.

Russia never claimed to be the land of the free or champion of democracy.

Ah, so it should not retroactively be held to a modern societal standard, but the US should?

Most of the northern states of USA (those in new England) had no slave since 1770.

HA! Perhaps not in name, but certainly in action. The difference is that the North had factories in which immigrants and children of all colors were held as de facto slaves.

If it is foolish, why the Armenian are asking Turkey to apologize for what they have done more than 90 years ago?

You'd have to educate us on what exactly happened 90 years ago, how the matter has been handled since then, the current social attitudes among both the Armenians and the Turks, and exactly what it is the apology is supposed to accomplish. And events circa WWI are certainly more "fresh" than those in the mid 1800s...

spikegirl7 · Post by **spikegirl7** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:09 pm

It was not the norm. Most advanced European powers abolished slavery before or during the Napoleonic wars. Most of the northern states of USA (those in new England) had no slave since 1770.

BZZZT!!! Wrong!

In the 1770s pretty much all European nations had slavery. In fact the end of slavery in Europe occurred between 1840 and 1860. We were a bit late to the party, but not by much.

IN fact the USA was one of the first among western nations to have laws prohibiting or limiting slavery. As you said, our northern states had limited or banned the import of slaves. Slaves existed there, but no new slaves could come.

In fact, in 1770, one of the only nations that did NOT have slavery was Japan and some of the northern states.

The Cid · Post by **The Cid** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:36 pm

Tell me, Spikegirl and Deacon...

Neither of you are trying to say that racism against black people was never that big a deal in the US, right? Or that slavery was okay simply because more people than just residents of Georgia were allowed to own slaves?

Bigity · Post by **Bigity** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:40 pm

ROFL nice tangent.

spikegirl7 · Post by **spikegirl7** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:40 pm

well if i were to say that i would be ignoring a lot of historical points. No. Racism against black people in this country caused a whole bunch o' problems. No, slavery is not a great thing.

However the world was different 200 years ago. I'm not going to condemn them because their values weren't the same as mine and they thought that it was ok to own slaves.

The Cid · Post by **The Cid** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:49 pm

Eh, I think it's okay to say that you condemn prior generations for the enslavement of other human beings. Maybe I'm just audacious like that.

Sorry, didn't mean to come across like I'm starting something. I've been keeping up on this thread and your statements simply had me a bit confused as all.

Real Life Forums

on the question: should Georgia apologize for slavery

Who is online