Aside from the slave trade @TakisMegas mentioned involving white slaves, there was also a prominent slave trade in the Middle East, in which African slaves were taken to the Arab world rather than the Americas. In terms of the number of slaves, it was actually comparable in size to the Atlantic slave trade, though I understand it was less intensive and took place over a longer period of time.
The past was not a great time to be alive.
Understood. Slavery is Slavery. There is no "Eh, it was only a little bit of slavery".
So going back a few pages in this thread, why does the American government still trade and purchase goods from these Arab countries that enslave humans, kill Gays and treat woman like trash?
So slavery of Whites by Blacks is a non issue because of ( insert excuse here). Slavery is slavery. If you want to get to the root of Humans enslaving Humans you have to research and have knowledge (which is easy to find in this day and age) of ALL instances of Human trafficking. Even the slave trade that is in the USA right now being conducted by the Latinos of Mexico and South American countries by their own people.
Of course when it happens - but thought vast majority of Slavery was in ME and Asia. TO DAY AND AGE, not 500 years past.
And obviously slavery is wrong - I always rejoice reading court imposing an additional salary to an exploited worker.
So slavery of Whites by Blacks is a non issue because of ( insert excuse here). Slavery is slavery. If you want to get to the root of Humans enslaving Humans you have to research and have knowledge (which is easy to find in this day and age) of ALL instances of Human trafficking. Even the slave trade that is in the USA right now being conducted by the Latinos of Mexico and South American countries by their own people.
False outrage. Bit of frankness please.
Slavery is always wrong, only you disapprove of it selectively - as suits your worldview. Otherwise you'd be busy campaigninc surely, as an injured party that could show those bastards.
I disapprove of it it always.
What part of Slavery is Slavery did you not understand?
So slavery of Whites by Blacks is a non issue because of ( insert excuse here). Slavery is slavery. If you want to get to the root of Humans enslaving Humans you have to research and have knowledge (which is easy to find in this day and age) of ALL instances of Human trafficking. Even the slave trade that is in the USA right now being conducted by the Latinos of Mexico and South American countries by their own people.
It would be an issue - but rather than do anything about it, you'll just imply we should not mind the enslaving of blacks, when posting this in full knowledge you will not do anything about your rigths or wrongs.
As they are.
That is no reason to be malicious towards African slaves if they have fought to get bit of recognition of their suffering.
How about taking this as an objective, and doing something about it?
So slavery of Whites by Blacks is a non issue because of ( insert excuse here). Slavery is slavery. If you want to get to the root of Humans enslaving Humans you have to research and have knowledge (which is easy to find in this day and age) of ALL instances of Human trafficking. Even the slave trade that is in the USA right now being conducted by the Latinos of Mexico and South American countries by their own people.
It would be an issue - but rather than do anything about it, you'll just imply we should not mind the enslaving of blacks, when posting this in full knowledge you will not do anything about your rigths or wrongs.
As they are.
That is no reason to be malicious towards African slaves if they have fought to get bit of recognition of their suffering.
How about taking this as an objective, and doing something about it?
So slavery of Whites by Blacks is a non issue because of ( insert excuse here). Slavery is slavery. If you want to get to the root of Humans enslaving Humans you have to research and have knowledge (which is easy to find in this day and age) of ALL instances of Human trafficking. Even the slave trade that is in the USA right now being conducted by the Latinos of Mexico and South American countries by their own people.
False outrage. Bit of frankness please.
Slavery is always wrong, only you disapprove of it selectively - as suits your worldview. Otherwise you'd be busy campaigninc surely, as an injured party that could show those bastards.
I disapprove of it it always.
What part of Slavery is Slavery did you not understand?
So slavery of Whites by Blacks is a non issue because of ( insert excuse here). Slavery is slavery. If you want to get to the root of Humans enslaving Humans you have to research and have knowledge (which is easy to find in this day and age) of ALL instances of Human trafficking. Even the slave trade that is in the USA right now being conducted by the Latinos of Mexico and South American countries by their own people.
It would be an issue - but rather than do anything about it, you'll just imply we should not mind the enslaving of blacks, when posting this in full knowledge you will not do anything about your rigths or wrongs.
As they are.
That is no reason to be malicious towards African slaves if they have fought to get bit of recognition of their suffering.
How about taking this as an objective, and doing something about it?
How am I malicious towards Blacks? How am I implying that you should not mind the enslaving of Blacks?
Slavery is slavery. I'm pointing out that slavery is happening right now in the USA and neither candidate said a thing about it or how they where going to stop it.
Are you seriously suggesting people whose ancerstors were slaves will soon be oppressive? If simply they want to count their blessings of democratic influence, accumulation of which is desperately needed in de facto bi-party system, I suggest you welcome it as any other such lobby, for fairness.
This group specifically? Not necessarily. But everyone holds the potential for great evil or great good. Suffering injustice in the past does not mean you will never inflict injustice yourself. As to my comment about this particular caucus, no, I'm not saying that their intentions are oppressive. I don't know enough about them to make any judgement at all. But other other people will make judgements, regardless of innocence of intent. Excluding anyone, even for completely valid reasons, has the potential to breed resentment. Whether it is justified or not.
*EDIT* I think I screwed up the quote. *EDIT EDIT* Nevermind, fixed.
What part of Slavery is Slavery did you not understand?
Oh, this be ... me!
I disapprove of slavery, but also of false outrage. Your purpose is to discredit black slavery, not to dimish it overall when it still persists, cruelly.
Otherwise you'd be asking community support for your just deeds, no doubt.
What part of Slavery is Slavery did you not understand?
Oh, this be ... me!
I disapprove of slavery, but also of false outrage. Your purpose is to discredit black slavery, not to dimish it overall when it still persists, cruelly.
Otherwise you'd be asking community support for your just deeds, no doubt.
I see here that you want to pick a fight. Even after pointing out multiple times that I would fight against the slavery of any human, you are still poking at me that I am discrediting black slavery.
The rest of the civilized world and a great amount of Blacks in North America have acknowledged the slave trade in the US and understand that it was a blight on its history. But there are still people who like to bring up specific histories but downplay other events that have happened to fit their narrative and or agenda. Whether they actually sit in community focus groups to easy the pain of these atrocities, or they use forums like this one to smash down and belittle people who try to bring in some knowledge of similar events that have happened in history to other humans.
My just deeds I would never need to place them in this forum, even if I am a progressive member in my multicultural community.
What part of Slavery is Slavery did you not understand?
Oh, this be ... me!
I disapprove of slavery, but also of false outrage. Your purpose is to discredit black slavery, not to dimish it overall when it still persists, cruelly.
Otherwise you'd be asking community support for your just deeds, no doubt.
I see here that you want to pick a fight. Even after pointing out multiple times that I would fight against the slavery of any human, you are still poking at me that I am discrediting black slavery. "But there are still people who like to bring up specific histories but downplay other events that have happened to fit their narrative and or agenda."
My just deeds I would never need to place them in this forum, even if I am a progressive member in my multicultural community.
Slavery is slavery.
--------------------
You see wrong. I am not into fighting - I only dislike false outrage.
You see what I hihglighted from you with quotation marks, or " " - and italics.
Was it not you, the very you, demanding islamophobia and other commirations to wash away your ancestral slavery of 500 years past or so, just now?
What part of Slavery is Slavery did you not understand?
Oh, this be ... me!
I disapprove of slavery, but also of false outrage. Your purpose is to discredit black slavery, not to dimish it overall when it still persists, cruelly.
Otherwise you'd be asking community support for your just deeds, no doubt.
I see here that you want to pick a fight. Even after pointing out multiple times that I would fight against the slavery of any human, you are still poking at me that I am discrediting black slavery. "But there are still people who like to bring up specific histories but downplay other events that have happened to fit their narrative and or agenda."
My just deeds I would never need to place them in this forum, even if I am a progressive member in my multicultural community.
Slavery is slavery.
--------------------
You see wrong. I am not into fighting - I only dislike false outrage.
You see what I hihglighted from you with quotation marks, or " " - and italics.
Was it not you, the very you, demanding islamophobia and other commirations to wash away your ancestral slavery of 500 years past or so, just now?
I frankly hope I imagined it, but plausibly not.
After all I posted you got "demanding Islamophobia" sad.
Just to let you in on a little secret, I am 8 to 12% Ottoman. I have Arab ancestry, and they where Muslim.
What part of Slavery is Slavery did you not understand?
Oh, this be ... me!
I disapprove of slavery, but also of false outrage. Your purpose is to discredit black slavery, not to dimish it overall when it still persists, cruelly.
Otherwise you'd be asking community support for your just deeds, no doubt.
I see here that you want to pick a fight. Even after pointing out multiple times that I would fight against the slavery of any human, you are still poking at me that I am discrediting black slavery. "But there are still people who like to bring up specific histories but downplay other events that have happened to fit their narrative and or agenda."
My just deeds I would never need to place them in this forum, even if I am a progressive member in my multicultural community.
Slavery is slavery.
--------------------
You see wrong. I am not into fighting - I only dislike false outrage.
You see what I hihglighted from you with quotation marks, or " " - and italics.
Was it not you, the very you, demanding islamophobia and other commirations to wash away your ancestral slavery of 500 years past or so, just now?
I frankly hope I imagined it, but plausibly not.
After all I posted you got "demanding Islamophobia" sad.
Just to let you in on a little secret, I am 8 to 12% Ottoman. I have Arab ancestry, and they where Muslim.
Not sad, but dangerous - and this is why I appreciate both Merkel and Gauck.
And your decendence is quite irrelevant because you only use it to feel wronged, but do nothing about it. Enjoy it, is all.
What part of Slavery is Slavery did you not understand?
Oh, this be ... me!
I disapprove of slavery, but also of false outrage. Your purpose is to discredit black slavery, not to dimish it overall when it still persists, cruelly.
Otherwise you'd be asking community support for your just deeds, no doubt.
I see here that you want to pick a fight. Even after pointing out multiple times that I would fight against the slavery of any human, you are still poking at me that I am discrediting black slavery. "But there are still people who like to bring up specific histories but downplay other events that have happened to fit their narrative and or agenda."
My just deeds I would never need to place them in this forum, even if I am a progressive member in my multicultural community.
Slavery is slavery.
--------------------
You see wrong. I am not into fighting - I only dislike false outrage.
You see what I hihglighted from you with quotation marks, or " " - and italics.
Was it not you, the very you, demanding islamophobia and other commirations to wash away your ancestral slavery of 500 years past or so, just now?
I frankly hope I imagined it, but plausibly not.
After all I posted you got "demanding Islamophobia" sad.
Just to let you in on a little secret, I am 8 to 12% Ottoman. I have Arab ancestry, and they where Muslim.
Not sad, but dangerous - and this is why I appreciate both Merkel and Gauck.
And your decendence is quite irrelevant because you only use it to feel wronged, but do nothing about it. Enjoy it, is all.
Now you are going to assume that I don't enjoy my heritage? And it's irrelevant? I was joining a discussion on slavery and now I'm being attacked by insinuations . I use my colourful Heritage to educate myself and others that ALL people should not judge a book by it's cover, only by it's deeds, that ALL people are equal no matter their color, religion or place of birth.
I would please like to ask you to stop labeling me as one of your DEMONS, I do not appreciate it.
Also I would like to suggest that you do not type while you are inebriated.
As @semiticgod has stated several times in this thread:
1) don't go personal in your comments; 2) if you feel someone is rude to you, report that comment, instead of arguing in the thread; 3) it doesn't help when we have 1 or 2 whole pages consisting of a banter between two forumites - for others it becomes very hard to understand what is being talked about.
I am uncertain why people are projecting only doom-and-gloom from a Trump Presidency. None of the "omg the world is going to end" scenarios happened when Obama won in 2008 then 2012 so none of the "the world is going to end" scenarios are going to happen now. There isn't going to be a wall, there won't be mass roundups and deportations, and sexism/racism aren't going to skyrocket.
It depends on your definition of skyrocket. I expect Trump's Justice Department to gut the civil rights division. I doubt we'll see any action from them on voter suppression or police shootings and we may not even see federal action on things like church burnings. The alt-right and the white nationalists went strong for Trump and they're going to want something in return, and decreased scrutiny is (imho) the most likely form of that return.
I do hope there isn't a wall or mass roundups, because that makes it far less likely that he'll be reelected in 2020.
Trump just announced Jeff Sessions as his Attorney General. This is guy who once joked: "The KKK is okay, until I learned they smoke marijuana." He was also denied a federal judgeship because of racist comments. So it looks like I was right, unfortunately.
Cabinet of Deplorables. The winner takes all nature of politics has possibly doomed the country and planet.
Hyperbole? Maybe not. Trump wants to pack the Supreme Court with 2-3 alt-right judges will which are appointed for life. And The Donald, a climate change denier, has planned a two pronged assault on the environment. He wants to gut the EPA (aka DEP to the ill-informed Donald) and is floating Sarah Palin and other crazy people to lead the Department of Interior who would love to open federal lands to drilling and every other thing.
Cabinet of Deplorables. The winner takes all nature of politics has possibly doomed the country and planet.
Hyperbole? Maybe not. Trump wants to pack the Supreme Court with 2-3 alt-right judges will which are appointed for life. And The Donald, a climate change denier, has planned a two pronged assault on the environment. He wants to gut the EPA (aka DEP to the ill-informed Donald) and is floating Sarah Palin and other crazy people to lead the Department of Interior who would love to open federal lands to drilling and every other thing.
How bad it's going to be is almost inconceivable at this point. But suffice to say, take the Bush Administration, and then multiply it by at least 5, if not 10, and you might be close.
Jeff Sessions is a scary pick for Attorney General. The position has a lot of independent policy authority and considering his past statements he could seriously abuse his prosecutorial discretion. It will be interesting to see if he actually believes in his federalist values when he is confronted with the increasing number of states that have legalized marijuana. He will also have some scary influence on immigration issues.
The pro-life position, as I understand it, is that a woman's right to choose, if existent, does not override the child's right to live. The pro-life position does NOT say women deserve to suffer for getting knocked up.
But I'm hearing a different idea from some forumites in this thread: the idea that people should not be given an easy way out of a bad situation, because it conflics with personal responsibility. If you do something wrong, you shouldn't try to reverse it; you should just deal with the consequences.
In this argument... the child doesn't even get mentioned.
Because, as I said earlier today, it isn't about children. The same people who want to force women to have babies are against every single social program that could conceivably help a child or low-income mother. It's about PUNISHING WOMEN.
Oh yeah, this guy.
I agree. I've pulled out of discussions on this thread for 3-4 days. All I see is forumites that are so pro(insert party here) that they even dismiss facts or reason because of their deep rooted hatred. Kinda like whats going on in the streets of America right now.
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt."
To be clear, bias is not what irks me. It is the imputing of poor intentions and claiming everyone who disagrees is either capital-E Evil or capital-S Stupid. Bias doesn't bother me, poor manners do. That said, the conversation hasn't taken that tone for several pages, so I'm hopeful things will be different going forward.
Regarding the hijab: Muslim critics of the veil have pointed out, correctly, that the hijab predates Mohammad by hundreds of years, and the Quran does not mandate it. Although Muslims today ascribe religious meaning to it and there are nonreligious reasons for wearing it as well, the hijab, historically, is an Arab custom and not an Islamic rule.
Catholic traditions also come from non-biblical sources. This does not mean they are not integral to their religion. I don't see many people claiming that the changes stemming from Vatican II "don't count" as religious doctrine.
Jeff Sessions is a scary pick for Attorney General. The position has a lot of independent policy authority and considering his past statements he could seriously abuse his prosecutorial discretion. It will be interesting to see if he actually believes in his federalist values when he is confronted with the increasing number of states that have legalized marijuana. He will also have some scary influence on immigration issues.
I wish I could impress upon people just how radicalized the Republican Party has become over the last 30 years. They have been playing with this particular fire for years. Trump was the inevitable result. However, due to a major flaw in our election system, he managed to win, even though he's going to end up losing the popular vote by almost 2 million. It's not just Sessions. Steve Bannon is a dark, dark figure (don't take my word for it, that's how he views himself). Just today, Trump agreed to pay $25 million in damages for his fraud of a University, and it seems to barely be making a blip in the news amidst the transition talk. Now, I don't care how left-wing or how right-wing you are, if Hillary Clinton was President-Elect right now and just agreed to settle a lawsuit for $25 million dollars, just how big of a story do you think it would be?? More to the point, would we ever hear the end of it?? The problem with Trump is that the sheer VOLUME of nonsense, lies and bullshit (partially by design) OVERWHELMS both the media and the public into submission. At a certain point, this type of stuff just became part of what he is about, and this odious buffoon has become normalized. This whole thing has staunch liberals like me hoping to a God I don't even really believe in that he actually picks Mitt Romney for Secretary of State so there is at least a fighting chance the entire world doesn't go down in flames within a year. I am against everything Mitt Romney stands for, but I don't believe he is a lunatic or unrepentant racist.
@jjstraka34 Are you implying that Trump and Clinton are judged by different standards?
I'm saying there has been absolutely nothing Hillary Clinton did in the last 30 years that wasn't raised to the level of a massive scandal (none of which ever amounted to much of anything at all, some of them made up out of whole cloth). Donald Trump is the first Presidential candidate to never release his tax returns. As I just mentioned, he just agreed to a $25 million dollar settlement in fraud case (though I'm skeptical he even has that much cash lying around that isn't tied up in property) after saying the ENTIRE campaign that he wasn't going to settle. The man admitted to sexual assault on tape, then 12 women came out and confirmed what he had already said himself. He admitted to walking in on teenage girls changing at a beauty pageant on purpose. It seems highly likely, if not impossible to me that he hasn't, in the past, been guilty of statutory rape, or just plain rape in general. So on one hand, yeah. It's not that the media didn't cover these things. It's that they pretended Hillary having a private email server was just as bad as the mountains of things Donald Trump has done.
The problem is that Donald Trump, through shear force of will, made his scandals and borderline criminal behavior seem normal by sheer volume. The one thing he absolutely understands is how to manipulate the part of the American public that is easily manipulated. He understands media. He understands the dark side of human nature that cheers and loves the villain. I don't even think he's that charismatic. He's basically like an ape who pounds his chest, throws his fist on the ground, and pronounces dominance over his territory. The man is not without real skills, the problem is that those skills are the kind of things that lead to horrific consequences when they are in the President of the United States.
This is an incorrect assessment. The Electoral College is not a "flaw" because they system of electing the President was *designed* that way on purpose. Rather than one nationwide election, there are 51 separate yet simultaneous elections which occur in every State and the District of Columbia. At best, it is an imperfect design which we addressed earlier in this thread (...or did I address that on my other board....somewhere....).
Given that the Electoral College is written into the Constitution, attempting to change it will require a Constitutional Amendment, a process which would probably take 10 years to complete if people start on it right now. The only way to get an amendment going is for a quorum of both Houses of Congress to convene and then pass the resolution by a supermajority (two-thirds) vote in both Houses or if two-thirds of States (which means 34 at this time) vote to force a convention in Congress. Once the proposed amendment passes one of these two hurdles then three-fourths of the States (38 at this time) have to ratify it *or* there have to be Statewide ratification conventions in three-fourths of the States (again, 38).
Impossible to make this change? No. LIkely or probable? I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it.
That being said, until such time as the Electoral College is abolished or changed statements such as "Clinton won the popular vote" are both factual and irrelevant.
Don't shoot the messenger. I didn't design the system, I merely state the facts.
This is an incorrect assessment. The Electoral College is not a "flaw" because they system of electing the President was *designed* that way on purpose. Rather than one nationwide election, there are 51 separate yet simultaneous elections which occur in every State and the District of Columbia. At best, it is an imperfect design which we addressed earlier in this thread (...or did I address that on my other board....somewhere....).
Given that the Electoral College is written into the Constitution, attempting to change it will require a Constitutional Amendment, a process which would probably take 10 years to complete if people start on it right now. The only way to get an amendment going is for a quorum of both Houses of Congress to convene and then pass the resolution by a supermajority (two-thirds) vote in both Houses or if two-thirds of States (which means 34 at this time) vote to force a convention in Congress. Once the proposed amendment passes one of these two hurdles then three-fourths of the States (38 at this time) have to ratify it *or* there have to be Statewide ratification conventions in three-fourths of the States (again, 38).
Impossible to make this change? No. LIkely or probable? I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it.
That being said, until such time as the Electoral College is abolished or changed statements such as "Clinton won the popular vote" are both factual and irrelevant.
Don't shoot the messenger. I didn't design the system, I merely state the facts.
One can certainly hold the opinion that it's flawed when it's denied the popular vote winner the White House twice in sixteen years. Funny how it happened to one party both times. Regardless, you're right, it is irrelevant. Trump is going to be President. I've never disputed that. I am saying that the 1.5-2 million more people who voted for Hillary are not going to take this lying down. I'm well aware of what it takes to change the Electoral College. I'm 100% for it, but it's not my main concern since that battle has already been lost for the time being. The time to do that would have been in 2000. This time it was even worse.
The rules are the rules. The rules suck, and have always sucked, but I certainly am not going to deny what they are. But I'm sticking by calling it flawed.
What part of Slavery is Slavery did you not understand?
Aside from the fact you only brought this up to delegitimise the usage of the US's slave-holding past to explain and defend actions taken by the former slave population, there's another problem with it:
Slavery isn't "slavery".
There are lots of different types of historical slavery, and lots of it was not even remotely as awful as British/American plantation slavery. Unfortunately, due to US dominance in world culture, nearly all treatments of slavery start from the assumption that all slavery was basically identical to British/American plantation slavery, which is untrue.
Sometimes it was even the best available humane option. Large-scale Roman slavery began because of the large numbers of POWs the Republic captured on its constant campaigns. Rome did not have prisons, so the likely fate of these thousands of people, were slavery not an option, is not pleasant. Slavery affected the Roman state in ways both good and bad (the loss of the slave population as Rome stopped expanding led indirectly to the manpower shortages that are one of the reasons the Western half of the empire collapsed), and slaves themselves were valuable commodities that to the best of our knowledge were actually treated quite while (by the standards of the time, not today) - and over time, they got more legal protections. They were also frequently freed after a certain period of service, or in the will of their owners. Some ended up becoming citizens, and a few freedmen rose to high influence and/or wealth. It was not a paradise, but it was better odds than a quick execution in the field would have given them.
In the modern world, slavery of any sort is unjustifiable, of course, but that is a paper-thin sliver of history.
Comments
So going back a few pages in this thread, why does the American government still trade and purchase goods from these Arab countries that enslave humans, kill Gays and treat woman like trash?
And obviously slavery is wrong - I always rejoice reading court imposing an additional salary to an exploited worker.
As they are.
That is no reason to be malicious towards African slaves if they have fought to get bit of recognition of their suffering.
How about taking this as an objective, and doing something about it?
What part of Slavery is Slavery did you not understand?Slavery is slavery. I'm pointing out that slavery is happening right now in the USA and neither candidate said a thing about it or how they where going to stop it.
Oh, this be ... me!
I disapprove of slavery, but also of false outrage. Your purpose is to discredit black slavery, not to dimish it overall when it still persists, cruelly.
Otherwise you'd be asking community support for your just deeds, no doubt.
I disapprove of slavery, but also of false outrage. Your purpose is to discredit black slavery, not to dimish it overall when it still persists, cruelly.
Otherwise you'd be asking community support for your just deeds, no doubt.
I see here that you want to pick a fight. Even after pointing out multiple times that I would fight against the slavery of any human, you are still poking at me that I am discrediting black slavery.
The rest of the civilized world and a great amount of Blacks in North America have acknowledged the slave trade in the US and understand that it was a blight on its history. But there are still people who like to bring up specific histories but downplay other events that have happened to fit their narrative and or agenda. Whether they actually sit in community focus groups to easy the pain of these atrocities, or they use forums like this one to smash down and belittle people who try to bring in some knowledge of similar events that have happened in history to other humans.
My just deeds I would never need to place them in this forum, even if I am a progressive member in my multicultural community.
Slavery is slavery.
"But there are still people who like to bring up specific histories but downplay other events that have happened to fit their narrative and or agenda."
My just deeds I would never need to place them in this forum, even if I am a progressive member in my multicultural community.
Slavery is slavery.
--------------------
You see wrong. I am not into fighting - I only dislike false outrage.
You see what I hihglighted from you with quotation marks, or " " - and italics.
Was it not you, the very you, demanding islamophobia and other commirations to wash away your ancestral slavery of 500 years past or so, just now?
I frankly hope I imagined it, but plausibly not.
You see wrong. I am not into fighting - I only dislike false outrage.
You see what I hihglighted from you with quotation marks, or " " - and italics.
Was it not you, the very you, demanding islamophobia and other commirations to wash away your ancestral slavery of 500 years past or so, just now?
I frankly hope I imagined it, but plausibly not.
After all I posted you got "demanding Islamophobia" sad.
Just to let you in on a little secret, I am 8 to 12% Ottoman. I have Arab ancestry, and they where Muslim.
Just to let you in on a little secret, I am 8 to 12% Ottoman. I have Arab ancestry, and they where Muslim.
Not sad, but dangerous - and this is why I appreciate both Merkel and Gauck.
And your decendence is quite irrelevant because you only use it to feel wronged, but do nothing about it. Enjoy it, is all.
And your decendence is quite irrelevant because you only use it to feel wronged, but do nothing about it. Enjoy it, is all.
Now you are going to assume that I don't enjoy my heritage? And it's irrelevant? I was joining a discussion on slavery and now I'm being attacked by insinuations .
I use my colourful Heritage to educate myself and others that ALL people should not judge a book by it's cover, only by it's deeds, that ALL people are equal no matter their color, religion or place of birth.
I would please like to ask you to stop labeling me as one of your DEMONS, I do not appreciate it.
Also I would like to suggest that you do not type while you are inebriated.
Can I get a Forum Mod please.
1) don't go personal in your comments;
2) if you feel someone is rude to you, report that comment, instead of arguing in the thread;
3) it doesn't help when we have 1 or 2 whole pages consisting of a banter between two forumites - for others it becomes very hard to understand what is being talked about.
I think we need a leader like Optimus Prime.
There are plenty of Megatrons out there who rule and provide peace through tyranny... Putin being your basic example.
But we need an Optimus to kick some decepti chops.
Any world leaders out there who could be given the matrix of leadership?
Hyperbole? Maybe not. Trump wants to pack the Supreme Court with 2-3 alt-right judges will which are appointed for life. And The Donald, a climate change denier, has planned a two pronged assault on the environment. He wants to gut the EPA (aka DEP to the ill-informed Donald) and is floating Sarah Palin and other crazy people to lead the Department of Interior who would love to open federal lands to drilling and every other thing.
http://grist.org/climate-energy/trump-wants-to-eliminate-the-department-of-environmental-colbert-points-out-a-problem/
That said, the conversation hasn't taken that tone for several pages, so I'm hopeful things will be different going forward.
The problem is that Donald Trump, through shear force of will, made his scandals and borderline criminal behavior seem normal by sheer volume. The one thing he absolutely understands is how to manipulate the part of the American public that is easily manipulated. He understands media. He understands the dark side of human nature that cheers and loves the villain. I don't even think he's that charismatic. He's basically like an ape who pounds his chest, throws his fist on the ground, and pronounces dominance over his territory. The man is not without real skills, the problem is that those skills are the kind of things that lead to horrific consequences when they are in the President of the United States.
Given that the Electoral College is written into the Constitution, attempting to change it will require a Constitutional Amendment, a process which would probably take 10 years to complete if people start on it right now. The only way to get an amendment going is for a quorum of both Houses of Congress to convene and then pass the resolution by a supermajority (two-thirds) vote in both Houses or if two-thirds of States (which means 34 at this time) vote to force a convention in Congress. Once the proposed amendment passes one of these two hurdles then three-fourths of the States (38 at this time) have to ratify it *or* there have to be Statewide ratification conventions in three-fourths of the States (again, 38).
Impossible to make this change? No. LIkely or probable? I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it.
That being said, until such time as the Electoral College is abolished or changed statements such as "Clinton won the popular vote" are both factual and irrelevant.
Don't shoot the messenger. I didn't design the system, I merely state the facts.
The rules are the rules. The rules suck, and have always sucked, but I certainly am not going to deny what they are. But I'm sticking by calling it flawed.
Slavery isn't "slavery".
There are lots of different types of historical slavery, and lots of it was not even remotely as awful as British/American plantation slavery. Unfortunately, due to US dominance in world culture, nearly all treatments of slavery start from the assumption that all slavery was basically identical to British/American plantation slavery, which is untrue.
Sometimes it was even the best available humane option. Large-scale Roman slavery began because of the large numbers of POWs the Republic captured on its constant campaigns. Rome did not have prisons, so the likely fate of these thousands of people, were slavery not an option, is not pleasant. Slavery affected the Roman state in ways both good and bad (the loss of the slave population as Rome stopped expanding led indirectly to the manpower shortages that are one of the reasons the Western half of the empire collapsed), and slaves themselves were valuable commodities that to the best of our knowledge were actually treated quite while (by the standards of the time, not today) - and over time, they got more legal protections. They were also frequently freed after a certain period of service, or in the will of their owners. Some ended up becoming citizens, and a few freedmen rose to high influence and/or wealth. It was not a paradise, but it was better odds than a quick execution in the field would have given them.
In the modern world, slavery of any sort is unjustifiable, of course, but that is a paper-thin sliver of history.