It blows my mind that Native Africans are never held responsible for the slave trade.

submitted by radicalcentristNational Centrism from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

This is probably going to piss people here off, but here goes.

It's dismissed because of solidarity. They still have a kinship that outranks bad deeds. On observation, it's very similar to the kinship that WN crave. Anyone not of tippity top stock recall reading how poorly lower classes of whites were treated by their betters (well.. now, even-- but mostly I'm referring to early 20th century and before)? It's that same level of dismissal, I would assume.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism[S] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Hmmm, even in that comparison, how come we don't see the same level of kinship among Asians?

For example, Japan's imperial conquests during WW2 also lead to a lot of slaves being taken from China, Korea, Philippines and so forth. And while Asians may have gotten over it now, Japan still had to pay atonement for it. Heck, there's even still controversy flying the WW2 Japanese flag in these countries.

Meanwhile, Black Americans have made no such demands for reparations from African traders. They also still fly and use the pan-african colors, even though ironically, it was Africans who kicked them out of their own continent first.

It's like history books completely erased Africa's involvement. The media tells us that out of the blue, ships just started dropping Africans off in the new world. But they never tell us WHO started packing those ships first, or WHO even arranged for the millions of Africans to actually board them instead of being told to stay home? Europeans couldn't have done that by themselves, unless they were mega geniuses and convinced a whole race to leave a continent using nothing but willpower.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

That's exactly why we don't see the same level of kinship among Asians. Within their own racial subgroups, they understand that there's not necessarily an automatic alliance simply because they come from the same continent. That's like comparing Eastern Europeans (whoops, I meant Hungarians. I hadn't eaten yet, dinner was ready and I rushed through my comment to start eating) to wanting to ally with Romanians, simply because they share a space. There's bad blood there.

[–]thefirststoneThat's my purse! I don't know you! 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

No, it isn't. It's dismissed out of guilt.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Out of guilt for what? I'm talking more along the lines of some former slaves within the US moving into the slave trade themselves being dismissed, less African traders. I could see guilt playing a factor there, is that what you mean?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

black people have kinship but also we see them killing themselves in places like chicago all the time. The kinship is there but not absolute. They don't criticize those african slave traders hundreds of years ago just like they don't criticize chicago gang members that murder. Maybe they shouldn't because that just sets the movement backwards. Should white people criticize every bad white person. Or just explain that it's a few bad apples so why focus on it?

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Should white people criticize every bad white person. Or just explain that it's a few bad apples so why focus on it?

White people are smart enough to create a justice and legal system, that assumes these discussions by default. However, even in the exceptional times where a bad white person flies under the radar, I wouldn't treat that as a good thing.

Case and point, George Bush II. His administration caused a great deal of harm, especially his blatant lying of invading Iraq, which got thousands of Americans dead, and made the Middle East even more chaotic. Yet, the media today is willingly to portray him as some kind of loveable oaf instead of the war criminal that he is.

The only positive take away is that none of Bush's presidential successors have actually tried to emulate him. However, imagine if no one was allowed to criticize Bush's legacy? Surely another person would then try to copy him, leading us down a path of more sorrow?

Blacks are absolutely stupid for not going after Chicago Gang Members or the African slave traders because it shows they are unable to police themselves, which is a basic requirement of creating civilization. But on top of that, they take their anger out on Whites as a means of scapegoating personal failure, when plenty of other black people they surround themselves with are the real source of their problems.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Sometimes I do see some black people trying to criticize violence in their community. They exist but aren't mentioned much on MSM for obvious reasons. Some people criticized W Bush then and now but aren't allowed on TV much. Because they would be criticizing him based on sending us into illegal war. Now we have plenty on TV criticizing Trump while he was president and now. Why is that, both are white men, but they are criticizing Trump based on BS reasons. He didn't lie us into war so can't criticize him based on that. Have to call him racist or a nazi despite facts showing the opposite. I would criticize Trump based on not building the wall or raising taxes but no one will be allowed on TV if they are saying that. Anyways my point is the MSM controls this narrative. We're discussing it on this site but would not be allowed to on other sites like reddit, same reason.