I’m Italian - and I was supremely ticked off when the outrage mob was threatening the local Columbus Statue.
On Deddit, I encountered someone who listed “better Italians” that should have statues. When I said “Italians will pick whoever they like to represent them” his response was “As long as it doesn’t offend my people.”
I laid into him. I told him “Your people were practicing human sacrifice and cannibalism when my people arrived. In fact, the word cannibal is derived from one of two things: it is a corruption of the word “Carib” - the name given to the people of the Caribbean, or it was the name of a particularly savage tribe, the Canib - who frequently raided towns, villages, and Columbus’ camps - and ate the people the captured.
So, the idea that your ancestors were dignified, noble people living in tranquility is BS. They perpetrated far worse on their own people than Columbus ever did.”
Cortez could not have taken Mexico without the help of the people the Aztecs had been enslaving and killing for human sacrifices. It says something that as horrific as the Spaniards were, it was worse before they came. For years people said the Spaniards were just making up stories to make the natives look bad, but in more recent years we have archaeological evidence that it was all true.
500 men and a huge army of natives who wanted to get rid of the Aztecs. Even today most parts of Mexico hate Mexico City. Kind of like Koreans hating Japanese. Those cultural resentments run deep. Just like some parts of the USA are better than others, some parts of Mexico are better. Living there gave me a very different perspective. Cortez also encouraged intermarriage on a way other conquistadors did not. For this reason very few Mexicans are pure anything. Some of my extended Mexican family have the same coloring I do, fair with green eyes. The history is very complex. Mexico even belonged to France for a bit with wonderful culinary consequences. If you look at where covid is hitting hard in Mexico, those are the bad parts LOL.
Many Indians have bought into the noble savage/Avatar beautiful blue people myth -- because 1) they don't know their own history (this is a very sad state of affairs -- shows how much history can be twisted as well); 2) it makes them feel good about themselves.
Everybody wants to not be "the baddies".
I'm of mostly Italian extraction (the part that isn't has a sizeable contribution from a couple of tribes, heh, go figure!) -- I rather prefer Columbus, problematic as he is: I suppose some noble sounding mythical entity might sound better, but I prefer a "warts and all" person instead. Besides, Columbus Day tends to often fall on my birthday. It always made me feel very American.
Any time I have pointed this out the goalposts move.
"Ok Native Americans owned slaves, but their nations aren't the subject here because they don't have power. White people and the United States are what we need to focus on."
For me, this is where the dialogue ends because at this point they have unmasked themselves. They don't truly care about slavery or any other social issue for that matter - they care about the movement. They care about being instruments of change, and in that, they care about attacking and defeating whiteness.
At any given time in 2016, an estimated 40.3 million people are in modern slavery, including 24.9 million in forced labour and 15.4 million in forced marriage.
Think of how crazy it sounds that white people should eternally be sorry for ever owning slaves, even if their family never owned slaves, but any other race who did own slaves gets a pass by the left.
Take reparations for example:
The left wants me to pay more taxes because they want to make sure black people get a paycheck for something that happened hundreds of years ago.
I'm half white, half Mexican. My dad's family came to America many years after the civil war. My mom's family was the result of Spanish mixing with Mayan. None of my family had ever owned slaves.
But because I have an Anglo-Saxon last name, they will make sure to tax me to pay for something my ancestors never had a part in.
They would tell you that even if your dad's family arrived after the Civil War, they've married themselves to plenty of pre-Civil War families along the way, so you've got plenty of slaveowner blood in you - Pay Up Racist!!!
But seriously, even if all your forebears came from the antebellum South, the historical reality is that even 90% of whites there did not own slaves. The irony is that there are some black Americans today with literally as much or more DNA in them that comes from actual real white plantation/slave owners, as there is in some white Americans. Maybe they'll be required to pay reparations to themselves.
They also imagine the Indians as one cohesive unit, instead of a number of tribes that had their own politics and conflicts. Some tribes loved us, and then there were some that hated us. You know the more I describe them, the more they sound like actual people.
Not just the Indians it happens with the barbarian tribes that overthrew the Western Roman Empire. These were just "immigrants" seeking to better themselves and it was a peaceful transition from Empire to the fractured Barbarian Successor states. Peter Heather in his Fall of Rome book does an excellent job refuting that idea. Well researched and written I highly recommend it.
He does. Early chapters talk about the idea of Romaness spreading and being adopted beyond Rome and to her provinces. Many examples. To juxtapose the differences between Caesar's Gaul and 4th and 5th century Gaul. One of the example of a renowned Latin orator born near Bordeaux and his interactions/letters with Symmachus a late 4th century Roman born Senator and Symmachus' praise of his poetry and Latin. A true born son of Rome and Senator praising a Gallic born Roman and his mastery of Latin. It's a great read, really fascinating.
Thanks, saved the comment to look up the author. Ancient Rome, Greece, all that interests me, particularly the end of the Western Empire and it's continuation in the East. (John Julius Norwich has a 3 Volume Masterpiece on the Rise and Fall of Byzantium and a condensed paperback of the trilogy. Norwich was a great author.) Appreciate the tip on the author,thanks again.
Neat, the Eastern Empire is the area where I have the weakest grasp, so I am definitely excited to look into that. No problem thanks for the tips as well!
It wasn't peaceful, but the fall of the western empire wasn't the barbarian fueled armageddon many portray it as either.
People seem to forget that the barbarian tribes were just that -- not one group. Many of the Germanic tribes (who are the ones principally remembered -- Attila notwithstanding) were Christianized, many had served in the legions (prior to the fall, but a fact many like to forget: Arminius was fighting against his own brother, Flavus) and were partially Romanized; a lot of them took to Romanization fairly quickly as it had some definite perks.
As with everything else, I'd say it was a bit of all -- the good and the bad.
Exactly! How do they not notice how racist it is, saying Indians were all just living peacefully together singing kumbaya? They're not some exotic pet, specially bred to live at one with nature. They're people, human beings that do good things and bad!
Based Dilbert merchant Scott Adams talks frequently about this. When calculating reparations, the real comparison that a data expert would look at would be the difference in quality of life of people in Africa versus the quality of life of African Americans.
Right. You never really hear "Just leave then!" in other countries because that's quite literally what everyone wants to do. GTFO and go somewhere with actual opportunity like the USA.
Of course. They all deserve to be sent back unfortunately none of them plan on doing that in fact they want to turn their new home into the same shithole they left
This is why the left wants to erase complicated history and rewrite it in their own version. Native Americans owning slaves? Even after the civil war? Nah. They were all allies and living in harmony until white man ruined everything. Now tear down that statue, comrade.
Didn't you know white Americans invented the practice of slavery? They went into the African jungles with nets and threw them over any unsuspecting Africans they found. The practice of slavery certainly didn't exist for thousands of years across Africa and the Middle East long before white people - let alone America - came along, and slaves certainly weren't purchased in existing slave markets operated largely by other Africans who routinely enslaved each other. That's all right-wing disinformation. /s
I told some idiot who claimed our Founders were racist “You know America inherited slavery from England and Spain - because it was a practice forced on us when we were colonies. Our founders didn’t start slavery. In fact, they set us on the path to end slavery. As a direct result of their actions, slavery existed in Independent America for just 75 years. (1787 - 1862)
Compare that to English/Spanish rule of 261 years of slavery. (1526 to 1787.)
Because that is literally how it is taught in public schools. You can look at your states curriculum online. I’ve taught both world history and US history at the high school level.
World history: not a single mention of slavery. Even the “slaves built the pyramids” thing is debunked.
US history: the entire first half of the school year is centered on the issue of slavery (with the occasional “white man bad to peaceful native Americans and women” thrown in). The entire second half of the school year is basically, “the civil war may have ended slavery, but not really. Oh, and Republicans = Great Depression and Nixon aka corruption. Democrats = Wilson and FDR aka the saviors of all mankind.”
Yep. My first lesson on slavery was the “Triangular Trade.” There was never any mention of the slaves of ancient times, the slaves of the Middle East, or anyone else.
Yup. The old “slave trade triangle” has been used for decades as a mnemonic device to get kids to memorize the “fact” that slave trading occurred exclusively between Europe, the Americas, and Africa. They try to get you to teach it like it was the only thing happening in the world at that time. Like white people were so bad that they stopped everything they were doing to go down to Africa and snatch up as many black people as they could so that they could force them to start building the “new world”.
I see from the description that Cynthia Ann Parker, after being kidnapped, "grew to love her captors" and it was tragic that they tried to bring her back to live among the bad, evil whites.
That kind of narrative really gets my goat. There's a book about the captured girl with the blue face tattoo that uses the same kind of narrative - "oh, it's fine, she grew to love her captors, she liked living among them, how terrible to take her back to her own people." This from a book written recently! They're talking about a traumatized child, who watched her own family be slaughtered, beaten for trying to escape, raped, and finally gives up and begins to identify with her captors. She has trouble integrating after years of captivity and they just pretend it must be because Indians were better than whites. They would never say that about a child who was kidnapped and kept captive by a white person, they would have compassion for them, talk about Stockholm Syndrome, the need for therapy to process the trauma. It's not okay to kidnap children just because you have brown skin and live in a tepee.
I’m in my late 20s and thought I had a rather conservative education. The things my history books/teachers left out about the Indians, Civil War, Watergate, etc really makes me wonder...
If I remember correctly, some of the descendants of Indians and their slaves were trying to get recognized as members of the tribe -- think they got turned down.
Nobody seems to want to recognize their white or black slave owning forebears.
Perhaps they could work out something like the income tax brackets --look up who the slave owners where in your family tree and how far back, take DNA test, determine percentages...the funding for all of this will have to come out of the set aside reparations account...everybody should get enough to buy themselves a Coke and a couple of singing lessons.
But of course. If we're going to have to deal with this critical race theory anti-justice bs, then let's go all the way...hell, let's make up little badges to be worn in public, little bio-chips in your ID and credit/debit cards denoting the percentage of non-white/white "blood" in everyone so we can really get into this.
Nope. Repetitions is more accurate. Because not only have we already paid it a thousand fold in dollars, not to mention blood, robbery, and rape. But we continue to pay over and over again.
When Anthony Johnson was released from servitude, he was legally recognized as a "free Negro." He became a successful farmer. In 1651 he owned 250 acres (100 ha), and the services of five indentured servants (four white and one black). [...]
Finding that Anthony Johnson still "owned" John Casor, the court ordered that he be returned with the court dues paid by Robert Parker.
This was the first instance of a judicial determination in the Thirteen Colonies holding that a person who had committed no crime could be held in servitude for life.
Dilsey Pope was born a free woman, and when she was older, she bought the man she loved in order to marry him. Many state laws at the time would not allow slaves to be emancipated, so it was common for family or spouses to technically own their family. Dilsy owned her own house and land, and she also hired her husband out as labor.
What makes this particular situation so unique is that when Dilsey and her husband had a fight, Dilsey sold him to her white neighbor out of spite. While many modern women might wish to get rid of their husbands, Dilsey truly takes the cake when it comes to method. Also like many other spouses, she later felt bad about the argument and tried to reconcile. The only problem was that when she went buy her husband back and apologize, her neighbor refused to sell him.
Jacob Gasken was born free only because his mother was a free woman. His father was still a slave at the time of his birth. This was rather common at the time, and the mother eventually wanted to buy Jacob’s father so that he would no longer have to work as a slave on a plantation. When Jacob grew older, his mother helped him to buy his father. The family was happy with this arrangement, although the father was technically still their slave until he attempted to do what all parents do: reprimand his son. This is when this story becomes notable.
One day, Jacob’s father scolded him after Jacob had misbehaved (as any good father would do). Jacob, a petulant, entitled boy, became so angry with his father that he sold him to a New Orleans trader and then later bragged to his friends and colleagues about sending his own father to be a slave on a plantation in Louisiana to “learn him some manners.”
Nat Butler makes this list for the special type of manipulative cruelty that he showed toward his fellow humans. Butler was one of the worst kinds of slave owners. Not only did he participate in the trade, but he actively tricked slaves into running away so that he could sell them back to their masters.
Butler would convince a slave to hide out on his property. Butler would then speak to the slave’s owner to find out what the reward was for returning him. If the reward was high, he would simply return the slave for the money. If the price was low, Butler would buy the slave then resell him to slave dealers down south for a profit.[3] He gained a bad reputation in his county for his scheming actions, and many attempted to hurt and even murder him for revenge.
How do they leave out the entire Middle East’s responsibility in this affair?
No mention if the saudi/muslim involvement. No mention if the people who actually owned the boats. I guess that part of history is too inconvenient for britannica
How do they leave out the entire Middle East’s responsibility in this affair?
Are you serious? Being a haji is a "I can do quite literally WHATEVER I want and get away with it" deal. Sexual emergency? Oh, that's just their culture. Acid attacks? Slutty white woman should cover up in her native country. No class is more protected than muzzies.
The numbers are a bit complicated because households vs individual persons owning slaves when counting. Wealth was the biggest factor on if you owned slaves.
In 1860 the town of Takon, forty miles from Benin, West Africa, was destroyed in a few hours. Its people were sleeping when King Gelele of Dahomey arrived with his army, including women warriors skilled at cutting off heads, armed with long knives and French guns. They surrounded all eight gates of Takon. The elderly, women and children trying to escape were caught, their jaw bones torn off, and decapitated. One of the survivors was Kossola, aged 19, who the day before had been contemplating marriage to a girl with gold bangles he’d seen in the local market.
He was tied into a line and marched first to Gelele’s palace, built out of dry human skulls: even the legs of his throne stood in them. From there on to the Barracoon, a Portuguese word for a barracks, a desolate holding pen from where Kossola and his fellow captives gazed out on to an ocean they’d never seen before.
At the Barracoon they saw white men for the first time and were selected in pairs, one man and one woman, until there were sixty- five couples. Taken to the port they saw Captain William Foster, who’d bought them on behalf of US businessman Timothy Meaher, saying goodbye to King Gelele.
Gelele (bigness), ma nyonzi (‘no way of lifting’ or too fat to carry, a compliment in his Yoruba culture) concentrated all his resources on providing slaves for the foreign market, sold for sixty dollars apiece. He kept a standing army of 12,000 warriors and the Dahoman year was divided into wars, when enemy settlements would be wiped out and slaves captured, and festivals, where slaves would be sacrificed or given to allies.
This is from Barracoon, Zora Neale Hurston's interviews with Kossola in the 1920s, one of the last slaves smuggled to the US (importing slaves was illegal as of 1808 in the US)
After five years in slavery, Cudjo was emancipated by the Union army and faced the challenge of freedom on the bottom rung of American society. Hurston finds him haunted by the Dahomey raid.
‘His face was twitching in abysmal pain. It was a horror mask. He was thinking aloud and gazing into the dead faces in the smoke.’
Despite that, he made a good life for himself, his beloved wife Seely and six children. Along with other survivors
another fun fact - most of the slaves in the slave trade did NOT go to America, they went to south America and other places
The most comprehensive analysis of shipping records over the course of the slave trade is the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database, edited by professors David Eltis and David Richardson. (While the editors are careful to say that all of their figures are estimates, I believe that they are the best estimates that we have, the proverbial "gold standard" in the field of the study of the slave trade.) Between 1525 and 1866, in the entire history of the slave trade to the New World, according to the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database, 12.5 million Africans were shipped to the New World. 10.7 million survived the dreaded Middle Passage, disembarking in North America, the Caribbean and South America.
And how many of these 10.7 million Africans were shipped directly to North America? Only about 388,000. That's right: a tiny percentage.
I mean i kinda see the point your trying to make but I’d say that whites did enslave blacks and I don’t think that quote is going to open people up to taking the rest of your sentiment seriously.
He still blames white people he just thinks that the native Americans were honorary white people in that situation. These people have been so trained to think that white people is basically the Empire from Star Wars that everything is considered to be a product of white people.
What if what they love is actually the idea that one day they'll be what they imagine whitey to be. A racist, cruel slavedriver whipping the poor defenseless black. What if the people supporting this shit aren't jealous of a human being but a monster. The scariest part is that unlike physical abuse which makes victims more likely to abuse others, this is perpetuated entirely psychologically on people who have never experienced the abuse. It's like that experiment with the monkeys where you beat a group of monkeys for climbing a rope and when you stop beating them, the monkeys beat any monkey who tries to climb the rope, then you replace every monkey in the group one by one until there are no monkeys left who were beaten and they STILL keep beating anyone who tries to climb the rope because that's just how they learned to do things?
The StarWars analogy always gets me. The Left likes to think of themselves as the Rebel Alliance, fighting against the big bad Empire. But they're too stupid to recognize that THEY are the Empire, and the Rebels are trying to preserve the way of life they've had for "X"years from being destroyed and replaced with shit that no one wants.
Child drag shows, trannys, infant murder, sexual deviancy is NOT an existing way of life, it's the new shit trying to destroy the old ways.
I think new star wars does it the way they think it is.... first order is all white dudes and chicks and the one black storm trooper is like NO. THIS IS WRONG...
Definitely justice, but it is kind to stick up for justice beyond your own society.
The Western drive to eliminate slavery around the world is not merely just, but it's also compassionate. It is due to our firm beliefs in equality which allow us to break the figurative chains of slavery.
It's why I have Native ancestry. White people took pity on a little girl who had been taken as a slave by another tribe per standard operating procedure.
It is almost as though history is full of Gray areas and stories that don't fit a clean that narrative and should be judged objectively not colored for political purposes.
I loath school teachers for not teaching this history. Instead they lie about so much and white kids grow up not only being punished for things they didn't do but based on a very selective reading of history.
If black Africans didn't enslave other Africans, there would be no slaves for anyone to even buy.
B b b but muhh party switch!! These people are so delusional they believe every good accomplishment republicans did in the past would be democrat accomplishments today. And every bad democrat policy is somehow republicans fault. Clown world.
Also tell him he's just another ignorant black man and if he thinks inner city schools are so bad he needs to keep his fucking mouth shut because he knows nothing.
I really can't stand that guy,him and Captain America aka Captain Social Justice are such whiny little faggots. Great video though OP -saved, thank you.
I'm sure he'll do some gymnastics and find a way to still blame whites. It's not like any of them actually give a shit about slavery or they would be blaming blacks too.
In this case they were owned by Redman and sold by Methodman. Marquez provided transportation and Goldberg financed the album. WuTang telling, history bitches! only on iTunes
Did the fool think that all the Native American tribes (native in the sense that they defeated whoever was on the land before them or claimed unconquered land themselves) were peaceful folk who lived off the land and got along will all others until those evil white people came and took over everything with the savageness that only unmelanated people can muster?
Not only that but they had no concept of land ownership (or so we are told) but today they think it was rightfully theirs. We like your white sense of ownership but not you whites.
They actually did have a concept of land ownership though, didn't they? After all, the tribes had territories even before the Europeans came, they went to war with each other and fought over access to territory. Even within some tribes individuals or families had rights to certain areas - a family might own a tree and the produce from that tree was theirs, or sections of land for a garden or part of a river was the property of a certain person or family. Not all tribes had the same setup, and it wasn't exactly the same as Europeans thought of as owning a piece of land, but they did understand having the rights to certain territory.
They've already scrubbed from history how some Native American tribes were cannibalistic. They now claim it was an old wives tale. But the fact is when whitey got here, they treated the natives like savages because they were indeed acting like savages.
Just wait until he finds out that it was blacks who hunted down and sold all the slaves. You want to wear Kenta cloth to represent your "pepoo" you are wearing the fashion of the black elites that sold your ancestors for profit.
Nah I'd rather have your filthy white imperialist slaver money to get me a flat screen and some new Jordan's. Buy my mama a new house and car she can't maintain in a neighborhood of scary white racists../s
He's probably cucked but I watch actors closely and he's one of the best. Watch his face and reaction when walking through that hospital after his mom shits on him and praises his dead thug brother in Crash. Dude can act. Him and Greg Kineer are some under rated actors i think are the best. They are probably both majorTrump haters but I give credit to their skill in acting.
I'm white and have a Native ancestor for that very reason. When Natives talk about what my people have done I become indignant with their ignorant asses with good cause.
That's not true: the tribe in my family tree was totally being genocided. In fact, they were down to 300 people at one point.
They were being killed in mass by their neighboring tribes and even their former tribe mates.
Then white people showed up. The tribe was incredibly peaceful (hence the violence they suffered, but just to stress this was a rare culture in the tribes) so they immediately made friends. Many Americans joined the tribe (because unlike most, they weren't racist). Suddenly, they had guns and allies. Their numbers exploded to over 3000, and they became one of the anchors of the entire plain Indian group.
Their territory ended up growing so large that they ended up donating land for reservations... To the very groups that had been killing them off a few generations before.
What I said was that there was no genocide of Indians (in general) by WHITES.
Many or most Indian tribes weren't friendly towards each other. Indians of one tribe killed Indians of other tribes all the time. If your ancestors' tribe was peaceful and was not attacking the other tribe back, and the other tribe was killing them to put an end to their tribe, then they definitely wanted to commit genocide.
Wait, people did do around hunting Indians. After 1849, in California there were general extermination campaigns run to kill natives. History is a complicated mire. Beware easy truths to satisfy todays needs.
Hunting and killing Indians that were not a danger to whites and.or not attacking/killing them was not a government policy or standard behavior.
Or, if there was a particular group of Indians that was attacking whites, I can see white people wanting to do away with that particular group, but whites did no commit genocide towards the Indians in general. The plan was always reserving land for the Indians, rather than doing away with them. There was no genocide of Indians by whites.
I guess I have to pull out my book collection to offer some good examples, but I do know that in California natives were not citizens and were not legally people and were openly hunted in campaigns of extermination in the bay area. There is a lot of political nonsense around words like genocide and holocaust.
In some cases retributive violence was used to excess. In limited cases tribes were hunted to extinction or driven to extinction through public policy written with full knowledge of the effects. History is tragic, but the extermination of natives wasnt a fair, nice, justified affair. It was a bloody mess, we won this territory by force of arms. America became an empire. We can acknowledge those facts and still salute our flag. We are humans, not perfect like God. Our creatioms always include the good with the evil.
I understand that there was bloodshed perpetuated by both sides. I do NOT agree that there was "genocide."
Many Indian tribes gratuitously killed Indians from other tribes long before whites arrived, and Indians also attacked and killed whites.
Indians weren't "natives" to America either. They also migrated to this land, and there were other people here before them.
Indian tribes lived on some isolated spots of land in this vast area we now know as the U.S. They never took ownership of the whole area, the tribes were not unified, they had no central government, the Indians, as a people, had no established borders, they had no claim to the whole area of the U.S., they never developed anything in this vast land that remotely indicated that this whole area was "taken," and they did nothing to make this land into a country. Furthermore, it was still a time of exploration, settlement, and development in this planet, and the strongest, the most capable, and most effective took over every land they could. The truth is that the Indians did NOT have a country, did NOT have borders, and this land was completely undeveloped, which suggested that it was NOT taken. If it hadn't been the Europeans to settle in America (reserving land for the Indians), to develop it, and turn it into a country with borders, it would have been the Chinese or the Arabs, and then there would indeed have been genocide, the Indians would either have all been killed, or the few left would have no land for themselves and would all be forced to be Muslims.
White people have recognized the Indian's rights to some of the land since the beginning, and this is still true today. There was conflict with some tribes and whites attacked Indians who attacked them and were dangerous to them. I'm sure there were some white people who hated Indians just for existing and/or who were particularly cruel to them, but they don't represent the attitude of most white people at any time, don't represent government policy at any time, and don't qualify to say that whites, in general, committed genocide of Indians in general.
They were lucky it was the white man that conquered them. If it was some other civilization, they would have never been given their reservation. Seeing how they treat other tribes, they almost died how they lived.
Exterminated. Taken as slaves and sacrificed. Erased from history.
You're in deep trouble if you haven't discovered/invented the wheel and are just prancing around land rich in resources and space. The Arabs would have loved conquering Native America.
This is hard to watch. Don thought he knew the bogeyman. He didn't. We see on camera the exact moment when his worldview collapses.
People of all colors and origins have the potential to be and do GOOD as well as EVIL. Jewish kapos in the Nazi concentration camps were as brutal as their guards. Arabs held slaves for centuries. Many of the slaves ended up in America, sold to white folks. Native Americans aren't just genetically good people. Each of us have to deserve our status in the world. Only simple-minded people, like the current leftists, forget this.
I wonder how many white folks here would discovery that they are the ancestors of indentured servants from Ireland or England? How many fell under the flag of some feudal Lord that basically owned them? How many Chinese here today come from Coolies that were basically slaves who built the railroads? etc.
We all come from some place or time where things were screwed up BY TODAY'S STANDARDS. Those caps are important. The SJW's of today insist on judging folks from history based upon standards which they did not have. They worked from the rule book that was valid for their time and place. Was evil done? Sure.
Needs more upvotes. This revisionism has been pushed by the left since the 60's when the Dems switched tactics from cruel overlords to pushing black victimhood. Quite the trick LBJ and it worked politically. During the Depression through the 50's, despite Jim Crow, black out of wedlock birthrate and literacy rates were only a few percentage points behind whites. Then the Dems screwed them over, again.
also Native Americans were not killed off by genocide
Native Americans are not a single group of people, they never saw themselves as such ..they spoke different languages had different cultures, had different physical features and lived all across the North American continent; saying our country was founded on the Genocide of Indians is wrong because Native Tribes often allied themselves with the US in war against other native tribes..so if it was genocide then according to liberal logic Native Americans committed genocide against themselves ??
90% of the Native American population was killed of by the accidental transmission of disease when European explorers, hired by European monarchs arrived in the new world...The U.S.A was founded hundreds of years later...liberals will often fire back , it was intentional transmission GENOCIDE!! they scream...they are often citing instances when anglos at war with tribes utilized disease as a bio-weapon to kill tribes they were at war with..this is a war crime...genocide however? no ..again 90% of native population was destroyed by european powers long before the USA was ever founded...
Native Americans were not considered U.S citizens...Jews in Germany were citizens and not engaged in war with Germany...Native Americans and Anglo Americans WERE AT WAR with one another ..both sides committed atrocities ..Native Americans targeted settlers and USA targeted Native villages..both were wrong but that's how it was then..or was it? During ww2 Japan and Germany targeted non military targets as did USA..did USA attempt genocide of Germans and Japanese? no they were at total war
If Native Americans were subjected to Genocide why were they not all killed off when they lost the Indian wars against the USA? only reason jews were spared was because the Germans lost...but USA won the Indian wars..so why are Natives still here if USA was genocidal ? They were not that's why
Did USA massacre many native american tribes? yes...but their is a distinction between massacres that occur during total war and strait up government backed genocide...I rest my case with the fact that Native American tribes often allied themselves with the USA, for protection and revenge, against hyper-aggressive enemy tribes...so if you say Native Americans experienced genocide then you must also say that Native Americans committed genocide against Native Americans....
Its important to remember no leftist arguments are sincere. They are always just a play for power and reality does not matter to them. When they speak to people outside their ideological bubble - its their demand that you capitulate to their "educated" perspective .
This is why we need a hard reset on what all actually gets taught in schools these days. Hardly anybody ever learns about all the other nations and all the other sets of people who owned slaves, or how much longer those slave trades lasted compared to what was going on with the US. Of course, with a system chock full of commies and woke morons, I don’t see it happening anytime soon.
Idk why native americans shy away from their heritage. If my grandpappy was sacrificing virgins to the blood gods and rode on a pale horse to the throne of skulls, I'd be rocking it and milking that infamy for all it's worth. Imagine being a badass that no man can kill, stealing women from cucks and getting high on peyote all day. That's so metal Lemmy is regretting not writing a song about it in his grave right now.
That look when cognitive dissonance gets tested.
Cognitive Dissonance True Awakening: Always looks like someone just got a hard right hand from Mike Tyson!
Enslaving each other was so damn common. The noble savage myth is all these granola crunching, dirt fucking hippies believe in.
Blame the French "philosphers" of the Jacobin (father of "marxism) persuasion.
Rousseau I think.
Always conquerers who use this revisionist "race" history tactic.
Ignorance is as bad as crack in turning people into total criminals.
add Michel Foucault the list
Sartre as well.
They're the nasty little flowers of abomination, sprouted in the garden of Rousseau, Hegel, and Marx (along with some lesser known contemporaries).
Dewey, don't forget him.
Nietzche? Heideggar?
Yes, it was Rousseau -- who was an absolute dickhead. He gets the blame for a lot of things, deservedly. Absolute degenerate and hypocrite.
I’m Italian - and I was supremely ticked off when the outrage mob was threatening the local Columbus Statue.
On Deddit, I encountered someone who listed “better Italians” that should have statues. When I said “Italians will pick whoever they like to represent them” his response was “As long as it doesn’t offend my people.”
I laid into him. I told him “Your people were practicing human sacrifice and cannibalism when my people arrived. In fact, the word cannibal is derived from one of two things: it is a corruption of the word “Carib” - the name given to the people of the Caribbean, or it was the name of a particularly savage tribe, the Canib - who frequently raided towns, villages, and Columbus’ camps - and ate the people the captured.
So, the idea that your ancestors were dignified, noble people living in tranquility is BS. They perpetrated far worse on their own people than Columbus ever did.”
Cortez could not have taken Mexico without the help of the people the Aztecs had been enslaving and killing for human sacrifices. It says something that as horrific as the Spaniards were, it was worse before they came. For years people said the Spaniards were just making up stories to make the natives look bad, but in more recent years we have archaeological evidence that it was all true.
There is a cryptonomicon reference in here somewhere. Good book if you can stomach the math.
I have been meaning to read it, hubby is Math PhD and has read it of course. It is floating around the house
And Cortez took it with 500 men.
500 men and a huge army of natives who wanted to get rid of the Aztecs. Even today most parts of Mexico hate Mexico City. Kind of like Koreans hating Japanese. Those cultural resentments run deep. Just like some parts of the USA are better than others, some parts of Mexico are better. Living there gave me a very different perspective. Cortez also encouraged intermarriage on a way other conquistadors did not. For this reason very few Mexicans are pure anything. Some of my extended Mexican family have the same coloring I do, fair with green eyes. The history is very complex. Mexico even belonged to France for a bit with wonderful culinary consequences. If you look at where covid is hitting hard in Mexico, those are the bad parts LOL.
Many Indians have bought into the noble savage/Avatar beautiful blue people myth -- because 1) they don't know their own history (this is a very sad state of affairs -- shows how much history can be twisted as well); 2) it makes them feel good about themselves.
Everybody wants to not be "the baddies".
I'm of mostly Italian extraction (the part that isn't has a sizeable contribution from a couple of tribes, heh, go figure!) -- I rather prefer Columbus, problematic as he is: I suppose some noble sounding mythical entity might sound better, but I prefer a "warts and all" person instead. Besides, Columbus Day tends to often fall on my birthday. It always made me feel very American.
Hence why only 5 tribes made it to "Civilized" status.
The ritual carried over to America
Any time I have pointed this out the goalposts move.
"Ok Native Americans owned slaves, but their nations aren't the subject here because they don't have power. White people and the United States are what we need to focus on."
For me, this is where the dialogue ends because at this point they have unmasked themselves. They don't truly care about slavery or any other social issue for that matter - they care about the movement. They care about being instruments of change, and in that, they care about attacking and defeating whiteness.
If you need a link to give them, try the International Labor Organisation
Then they can't accuse you of right-wing bias :)
https://www.ilo.org/global/topics/forced-labour/lang--en/index.htm
Dude black people owned slaves.
Think of how crazy it sounds that white people should eternally be sorry for ever owning slaves, even if their family never owned slaves, but any other race who did own slaves gets a pass by the left.
Take reparations for example:
The left wants me to pay more taxes because they want to make sure black people get a paycheck for something that happened hundreds of years ago.
I'm half white, half Mexican. My dad's family came to America many years after the civil war. My mom's family was the result of Spanish mixing with Mayan. None of my family had ever owned slaves.
But because I have an Anglo-Saxon last name, they will make sure to tax me to pay for something my ancestors never had a part in.
They would tell you that even if your dad's family arrived after the Civil War, they've married themselves to plenty of pre-Civil War families along the way, so you've got plenty of slaveowner blood in you - Pay Up Racist!!!
But seriously, even if all your forebears came from the antebellum South, the historical reality is that even 90% of whites there did not own slaves. The irony is that there are some black Americans today with literally as much or more DNA in them that comes from actual real white plantation/slave owners, as there is in some white Americans. Maybe they'll be required to pay reparations to themselves.
They also imagine the Indians as one cohesive unit, instead of a number of tribes that had their own politics and conflicts. Some tribes loved us, and then there were some that hated us. You know the more I describe them, the more they sound like actual people.
Not just the Indians it happens with the barbarian tribes that overthrew the Western Roman Empire. These were just "immigrants" seeking to better themselves and it was a peaceful transition from Empire to the fractured Barbarian Successor states. Peter Heather in his Fall of Rome book does an excellent job refuting that idea. Well researched and written I highly recommend it.
I'd love to read it. I know that a huge portion of Gaul was very "Romanized" as well. Does he go into that?
He does. Early chapters talk about the idea of Romaness spreading and being adopted beyond Rome and to her provinces. Many examples. To juxtapose the differences between Caesar's Gaul and 4th and 5th century Gaul. One of the example of a renowned Latin orator born near Bordeaux and his interactions/letters with Symmachus a late 4th century Roman born Senator and Symmachus' praise of his poetry and Latin. A true born son of Rome and Senator praising a Gallic born Roman and his mastery of Latin. It's a great read, really fascinating.
thanks for the recommendation. I absolutely love books about ancient Rome. For the record, Robin Lane Smith the classical world was excellent as well.
Thanks, saved the comment to look up the author. Ancient Rome, Greece, all that interests me, particularly the end of the Western Empire and it's continuation in the East. (John Julius Norwich has a 3 Volume Masterpiece on the Rise and Fall of Byzantium and a condensed paperback of the trilogy. Norwich was a great author.) Appreciate the tip on the author,thanks again.
Neat, the Eastern Empire is the area where I have the weakest grasp, so I am definitely excited to look into that. No problem thanks for the tips as well!
It wasn't peaceful, but the fall of the western empire wasn't the barbarian fueled armageddon many portray it as either.
People seem to forget that the barbarian tribes were just that -- not one group. Many of the Germanic tribes (who are the ones principally remembered -- Attila notwithstanding) were Christianized, many had served in the legions (prior to the fall, but a fact many like to forget: Arminius was fighting against his own brother, Flavus) and were partially Romanized; a lot of them took to Romanization fairly quickly as it had some definite perks.
As with everything else, I'd say it was a bit of all -- the good and the bad.
Exactly! How do they not notice how racist it is, saying Indians were all just living peacefully together singing kumbaya? They're not some exotic pet, specially bred to live at one with nature. They're people, human beings that do good things and bad!
Well ain’t history a bitch
He even touched his ear. Probably thought his brain was leaking out
If anything, black people owe whites reparations, because if whites had not brought their ancestors here, they’d be living in the shithole of Africa.
Based Dilbert merchant Scott Adams talks frequently about this. When calculating reparations, the real comparison that a data expert would look at would be the difference in quality of life of people in Africa versus the quality of life of African Americans.
The fact that they aren't fleeing to Africa kind of underlines the point.
We should do Liberia again for the BLMers. Is Greenland still for sale?
That would be a total waste. Might I suggest Qatar?
What did Greenland ever do to you?
It has to be native land. Like the congo.
Right. You never really hear "Just leave then!" in other countries because that's quite literally what everyone wants to do. GTFO and go somewhere with actual opportunity like the USA.
Of course. They all deserve to be sent back unfortunately none of them plan on doing that in fact they want to turn their new home into the same shithole they left
Imagine if the US gov't had all the money back it has spent on housing, feeding and playing daddy to the baby mommas.
Now, that’s the persuasive way of doing it. I wonder why? 😉
now that's spicy
Need that spice for my mud cookies.
Or for those that died in the CIvil War. Don't even have the decency to say thank you.
Now THAT'S the real spicy comment
Their ancestors probably would have died of malaria in Africa.
Or from getting eaten by hungry hungry hippos.
Objective thinking is racist, bigots!
https://thedonald.win/p/GIlQRyei/a-war-against-objective-thinking/c/
This is why the left wants to erase complicated history and rewrite it in their own version. Native Americans owning slaves? Even after the civil war? Nah. They were all allies and living in harmony until white man ruined everything. Now tear down that statue, comrade.
Yes - before whites all non-whites lived in harmony
ever notice how africa and this middle east are living perfect harmony without white people... oh wait.
Its a shame because the middle east couldve been great if it wasnt for Islam.
and obama
Didn't you know white Americans invented the practice of slavery? They went into the African jungles with nets and threw them over any unsuspecting Africans they found. The practice of slavery certainly didn't exist for thousands of years across Africa and the Middle East long before white people - let alone America - came along, and slaves certainly weren't purchased in existing slave markets operated largely by other Africans who routinely enslaved each other. That's all right-wing disinformation. /s
quit making shit up, our betters have told us white people invented slavery in america and that is all there is to it. (/s)
Yeaaahhh...bigot!
Now get in the railcars to quarantine camp!
You'll get your "vaccine" on arrival!
Abeed, The Arab word for black person translates to slave.
I told some idiot who claimed our Founders were racist “You know America inherited slavery from England and Spain - because it was a practice forced on us when we were colonies. Our founders didn’t start slavery. In fact, they set us on the path to end slavery. As a direct result of their actions, slavery existed in Independent America for just 75 years. (1787 - 1862)
Compare that to English/Spanish rule of 261 years of slavery. (1526 to 1787.)
That's frighteningly close to what many of them believe.
A lot of dumbasses think america invented slavery.
Because that is literally how it is taught in public schools. You can look at your states curriculum online. I’ve taught both world history and US history at the high school level.
World history: not a single mention of slavery. Even the “slaves built the pyramids” thing is debunked.
US history: the entire first half of the school year is centered on the issue of slavery (with the occasional “white man bad to peaceful native Americans and women” thrown in). The entire second half of the school year is basically, “the civil war may have ended slavery, but not really. Oh, and Republicans = Great Depression and Nixon aka corruption. Democrats = Wilson and FDR aka the saviors of all mankind.”
Yep. My first lesson on slavery was the “Triangular Trade.” There was never any mention of the slaves of ancient times, the slaves of the Middle East, or anyone else.
Slavery was all American.
Yup. The old “slave trade triangle” has been used for decades as a mnemonic device to get kids to memorize the “fact” that slave trading occurred exclusively between Europe, the Americas, and Africa. They try to get you to teach it like it was the only thing happening in the world at that time. Like white people were so bad that they stopped everything they were doing to go down to Africa and snatch up as many black people as they could so that they could force them to start building the “new world”.
Yup... they were totally workers... workers that were forced to work under punishment of death and paid in food.
You forgot the 6 page paper about the Muslim American who convinced white people to start the civil war.
I see from the description that Cynthia Ann Parker, after being kidnapped, "grew to love her captors" and it was tragic that they tried to bring her back to live among the bad, evil whites.
That kind of narrative really gets my goat. There's a book about the captured girl with the blue face tattoo that uses the same kind of narrative - "oh, it's fine, she grew to love her captors, she liked living among them, how terrible to take her back to her own people." This from a book written recently! They're talking about a traumatized child, who watched her own family be slaughtered, beaten for trying to escape, raped, and finally gives up and begins to identify with her captors. She has trouble integrating after years of captivity and they just pretend it must be because Indians were better than whites. They would never say that about a child who was kidnapped and kept captive by a white person, they would have compassion for them, talk about Stockholm Syndrome, the need for therapy to process the trauma. It's not okay to kidnap children just because you have brown skin and live in a tepee.
I’m in my late 20s and thought I had a rather conservative education. The things my history books/teachers left out about the Indians, Civil War, Watergate, etc really makes me wonder...
Hold up. So when was last slave liberated from indians?
Do we need to change juneteenth?
Let’s ask Gorsuch and Roberts. Maybe slavery is still legal in certain areas. They can figure it out.
True, that treaty requiring the tribes to liberate their slaves may have had a mistake in it.
“Sorry Clarence, it says right here that you are technically still RBG’s slave. You must rule however she demands you to now.”
I think this means we get Oklahoma back.
Clearly the native Americans all need to be paying repetitions too
You gave me an idea! Can we just let black neighborhoods open casinos? Reperations solved bro
Hahahahahahahaha hahahaha....
Haaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahajahajajajajnhahahahahaha
👍👌
They already have
Poor ashy Larry. Little did we know Larry would turn trans and become the first African American first lady
Headline the next day: “49,000 shot this past weekend...”
Oh fuck that's hilarious! Let them open legal brothels too as part of the REP-UH-RASHIONS!
Just give them the Indian casinos
So what do we do with the people that were the product of a slave owner and a slave? Do they pay themselves their own reperations?
or free blacks who owned slaves, which was pretty common. Hell, Obama's white side of his family owned slaves.
Now tell Cheadle about the free black Buffalo Soldiers who hunted down and killed Natives.
He could probably afford it with that Texas Ranger Money.
If I remember correctly, some of the descendants of Indians and their slaves were trying to get recognized as members of the tribe -- think they got turned down.
Nobody seems to want to recognize their white or black slave owning forebears.
Perhaps they could work out something like the income tax brackets --look up who the slave owners where in your family tree and how far back, take DNA test, determine percentages...the funding for all of this will have to come out of the set aside reparations account...everybody should get enough to buy themselves a Coke and a couple of singing lessons.
so forcing people to take DNA tests to determine who pays or doesn't? lol
But of course. If we're going to have to deal with this critical race theory anti-justice bs, then let's go all the way...hell, let's make up little badges to be worn in public, little bio-chips in your ID and credit/debit cards denoting the percentage of non-white/white "blood" in everyone so we can really get into this.
23 and Me will be delighted I'm sure.
*reparations. repetitions are the amount of lifts you do in a set.
Nope. Repetitions is more accurate. Because not only have we already paid it a thousand fold in dollars, not to mention blood, robbery, and rape. But we continue to pay over and over again.
Repetitious Reparations, I get it
The Five "Civilized" Nations sure have some splainin' to do.
First slave on what is now the USA was owned by a black man. Black dude fought a court case to make it legal.
Let the blacks pay the blacks (and net money out) and keep the rest of the country out of it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Johnson_(colonist)
Re: the black one, Jonson would not let him go. Black "slave" asked two white men (Captain Samuel Goldsmith & Robert Parker -https://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/court_ruling_on_anthony_johnson_and_his_servant_1655 ) to help him, and the white dudes tried and gave the black "slave" an honest job.
Johnson (black master) took them all to court.
Although a minority, more than a few American blacks owned slaves - http://theweeklychallenger.com/top-10-black-slaveowners/ (not top 10 in total ownership number, but just an assortment).
Damn.
Even during slavery times, black people were evil towards each other.
Sad to see that nothing has changed even after slavery had been abolished hundreds of years ago.
Im curious for a source. I'm intrigued by this fact and can use it arguements.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/transatlantic-slave-trade
How do they leave out the entire Middle East’s responsibility in this affair?
No mention if the saudi/muslim involvement. No mention if the people who actually owned the boats. I guess that part of history is too inconvenient for britannica
Every source has its biases hence the importance of multiple sources.
Britannica is one of those “reputable” sources that college professors love... because they are the ones who write it.
Are you serious? Being a haji is a "I can do quite literally WHATEVER I want and get away with it" deal. Sexual emergency? Oh, that's just their culture. Acid attacks? Slutty white woman should cover up in her native country. No class is more protected than muzzies.
The numbers are a bit complicated because households vs individual persons owning slaves when counting. Wealth was the biggest factor on if you owned slaves.
https://www.africanamerica.org/topic/did-black-people-own-slaves
This is from Barracoon, Zora Neale Hurston's interviews with Kossola in the 1920s, one of the last slaves smuggled to the US (importing slaves was illegal as of 1808 in the US)
https://conservativewoman.co.uk/black-trailblazer-who-was-no-slave-to-victimhood/
https://www.africanamerica.org/topic/did-black-people-own-slaves
another fun fact - most of the slaves in the slave trade did NOT go to America, they went to south America and other places
https://www.theroot.com/how-many-slaves-landed-in-the-us-1790873989
The very first slave owner in America was a black dude.
"documented slave owner" but yes. And he owned a white man. The court case about it is the only reason we know.
P. S. He won the case and was able to keep the white man as his slave until his death
If anything, black people owe whites reparations, because if whites had not brought their ancestors here, they’d be living in the shithole of Africa.
I mean i kinda see the point your trying to make but I’d say that whites did enslave blacks and I don’t think that quote is going to open people up to taking the rest of your sentiment seriously.
He really did look disappointed didn't he. Now who is he gonna blame?
Imagine his whole like had been blaming the white people.
He's still sitting around blaming white people though I'm sure. It's no fun blaming Indians.
He still blames white people he just thinks that the native Americans were honorary white people in that situation. These people have been so trained to think that white people is basically the Empire from Star Wars that everything is considered to be a product of white people.
Nah what he thinks is that white people enslaved Indians, and if those Indians enslaved blacks, than white people are still to blame.
Yay!!
They LOVE whitey - an wish to god they could have been white.
What if what they love is actually the idea that one day they'll be what they imagine whitey to be. A racist, cruel slavedriver whipping the poor defenseless black. What if the people supporting this shit aren't jealous of a human being but a monster. The scariest part is that unlike physical abuse which makes victims more likely to abuse others, this is perpetuated entirely psychologically on people who have never experienced the abuse. It's like that experiment with the monkeys where you beat a group of monkeys for climbing a rope and when you stop beating them, the monkeys beat any monkey who tries to climb the rope, then you replace every monkey in the group one by one until there are no monkeys left who were beaten and they STILL keep beating anyone who tries to climb the rope because that's just how they learned to do things?
The StarWars analogy always gets me. The Left likes to think of themselves as the Rebel Alliance, fighting against the big bad Empire. But they're too stupid to recognize that THEY are the Empire, and the Rebels are trying to preserve the way of life they've had for "X"years from being destroyed and replaced with shit that no one wants.
Child drag shows, trannys, infant murder, sexual deviancy is NOT an existing way of life, it's the new shit trying to destroy the old ways.
I think new star wars does it the way they think it is.... first order is all white dudes and chicks and the one black storm trooper is like NO. THIS IS WRONG...
In this case, the white people actually freed his ancestors out of kindness alone.
Kindness?
Or a sense of justice.
They are related, of course, but justice is less subjective. And it's what our country is built on...unless people undermine it.
It is still one of our values.
Definitely justice, but it is kind to stick up for justice beyond your own society.
The Western drive to eliminate slavery around the world is not merely just, but it's also compassionate. It is due to our firm beliefs in equality which allow us to break the figurative chains of slavery.
It's why I have Native ancestry. White people took pity on a little girl who had been taken as a slave by another tribe per standard operating procedure.
Easy, he'll just think his ancestors were enslaved by "white indians".
Well this white guy can always stop watching his movies. Let the hate flow dipshit because none of us need you and we can prove it to you.
It is almost as though history is full of Gray areas and stories that don't fit a clean that narrative and should be judged objectively not colored for political purposes.
It's almost like that yeah.
REEEEEEEEEEEE!!
Objective thinking and discernment are White Supremacist thinking,
Blanconormative thinking is racist
Bland is best!
Lol Bland Lives Matter
wow don cheadle is so lucky that white people went to bat for his people like that. you are welcome don!
History. Complicated. Natives. Disappointed. Victimization. Deflated. Balls. Blue.
Cheadle.
...fag.
I loath school teachers for not teaching this history. Instead they lie about so much and white kids grow up not only being punished for things they didn't do but based on a very selective reading of history.
If black Africans didn't enslave other Africans, there would be no slaves for anyone to even buy.
And they continue to commit genocide and put people into slavery to this day and American blacks bitch about oppression and celebrate their ancestors.
Ok now tell him democrats actually owned slaves not republicans
B b b but muhh party switch!! These people are so delusional they believe every good accomplishment republicans did in the past would be democrat accomplishments today. And every bad democrat policy is somehow republicans fault. Clown world.
ThE PaRtiEs sWitChEd
Also tell him he's just another ignorant black man and if he thinks inner city schools are so bad he needs to keep his fucking mouth shut because he knows nothing.
"What are they? Honorary white people?" Hey Don, GO FUCK YOURSELF
I really can't stand that guy,him and Captain America aka Captain Social Justice are such whiny little faggots. Great video though OP -saved, thank you.
Original video gone. Can you please reupload it to dtube or the likes and repost?
Just click on the title and open it in YouTube ffs.
still better than the original war machine actor..mr divide by zero.
I forgot about him, he went to bat big time for Smollett and his (Subway) bag of lies.
People get so angry when they find out they aren’t a victim of white people.
And then promptly go find a new reason to hate white people.
Will he hate native Americans now too? Or forgive?
I'm sure he'll do some gymnastics and find a way to still blame whites. It's not like any of them actually give a shit about slavery or they would be blaming blacks too.
If only he cared about the millions of slaves in Africa in 2020.
They weren't OWNED by whitey, but they sure as hell were SOLD by blackey ! (:-)
In this case they were owned by Redman and sold by Methodman. Marquez provided transportation and Goldberg financed the album. WuTang telling, history bitches! only on iTunes
and by yankee
No reparations for you!
No, no, no, I support reparations for Don. This man needs a square mile or two of eastern Oklahoma since it’s 5 Tribe’s land now
Maybe he should seek reparations from the reparations the Native Americans have been receiving.
As an aside -That looks like an interesting show.
Lolololol
It's almost like history isn't...
*puts on sunglasses*
....black and white
Thank you ladies and gentlemen I'll be here all week.
Did the fool think that all the Native American tribes (native in the sense that they defeated whoever was on the land before them or claimed unconquered land themselves) were peaceful folk who lived off the land and got along will all others until those evil white people came and took over everything with the savageness that only unmelanated people can muster?
Yes
Not only that but they had no concept of land ownership (or so we are told) but today they think it was rightfully theirs. We like your white sense of ownership but not you whites.
They actually did have a concept of land ownership though, didn't they? After all, the tribes had territories even before the Europeans came, they went to war with each other and fought over access to territory. Even within some tribes individuals or families had rights to certain areas - a family might own a tree and the produce from that tree was theirs, or sections of land for a garden or part of a river was the property of a certain person or family. Not all tribes had the same setup, and it wasn't exactly the same as Europeans thought of as owning a piece of land, but they did understand having the rights to certain territory.
They sang "The Colors Of The Wind" all day and ate Pow Wow Chow for supper
Woke Disney
They've already scrubbed from history how some Native American tribes were cannibalistic. They now claim it was an old wives tale. But the fact is when whitey got here, they treated the natives like savages because they were indeed acting like savages.
“What are they, honorary WHITE PEOPLE?!” he asks. Jesus Christ, fuck this guy. What a racist piece of shit!
Just wait until he finds out that it was blacks who hunted down and sold all the slaves. You want to wear Kenta cloth to represent your "pepoo" you are wearing the fashion of the black elites that sold your ancestors for profit.
"what were they honorary white people?"
You mean... citizens?
Give it 5 minutes - they will erase that part of history
Nah I'd rather have your filthy white imperialist slaver money to get me a flat screen and some new Jordan's. Buy my mama a new house and car she can't maintain in a neighborhood of scary white racists../s
He's probably cucked but I watch actors closely and he's one of the best. Watch his face and reaction when walking through that hospital after his mom shits on him and praises his dead thug brother in Crash. Dude can act. Him and Greg Kineer are some under rated actors i think are the best. They are probably both majorTrump haters but I give credit to their skill in acting.
He is a great actor and I always respected him. Lately I want nothing to do with his fake woke ass.
Yes - he got me banned from Twitter once. So yeah - he is a major Trump and white people hater.
He looks disappointed it wasn’t done by whitey...
HAHAHAHA omg this is absolute gold holy crap
Yeah Don...get fucked asshole. No more 'blame whitey' for you.
bwhahah DEPORT the CHEADLE!
maybe it is okay that we killed indians now?
Indians killed white people too, and contrary to what leftards say, there was no genocide of Indians.
White people didn't go around hunting Indians to kill them, nor did they gather them out of the blue and shot them dead.
There were fights, and there was illness; that's how many Indians died.
To be fair it was exactly what they did amongst themselves before we even got here.
Virginia Dare liked this comment
Wait until they learn what native Americans did to women and young girls of competing tribes.
Gonna be a lot of tendies spilled on that whole piece of history!
I'm white and have a Native ancestor for that very reason. When Natives talk about what my people have done I become indignant with their ignorant asses with good cause.
That's not true: the tribe in my family tree was totally being genocided. In fact, they were down to 300 people at one point.
They were being killed in mass by their neighboring tribes and even their former tribe mates.
Then white people showed up. The tribe was incredibly peaceful (hence the violence they suffered, but just to stress this was a rare culture in the tribes) so they immediately made friends. Many Americans joined the tribe (because unlike most, they weren't racist). Suddenly, they had guns and allies. Their numbers exploded to over 3000, and they became one of the anchors of the entire plain Indian group.
Their territory ended up growing so large that they ended up donating land for reservations... To the very groups that had been killing them off a few generations before.
Wow, that’s a very interesting story. I’d like to learn more about it. Do you have any place I could go to check it out?
What I said was that there was no genocide of Indians (in general) by WHITES.
Many or most Indian tribes weren't friendly towards each other. Indians of one tribe killed Indians of other tribes all the time. If your ancestors' tribe was peaceful and was not attacking the other tribe back, and the other tribe was killing them to put an end to their tribe, then they definitely wanted to commit genocide.
Wait, people did do around hunting Indians. After 1849, in California there were general extermination campaigns run to kill natives. History is a complicated mire. Beware easy truths to satisfy todays needs.
There are bad people in all races and groups.
Hunting and killing Indians that were not a danger to whites and.or not attacking/killing them was not a government policy or standard behavior.
Or, if there was a particular group of Indians that was attacking whites, I can see white people wanting to do away with that particular group, but whites did no commit genocide towards the Indians in general. The plan was always reserving land for the Indians, rather than doing away with them. There was no genocide of Indians by whites.
I guess I have to pull out my book collection to offer some good examples, but I do know that in California natives were not citizens and were not legally people and were openly hunted in campaigns of extermination in the bay area. There is a lot of political nonsense around words like genocide and holocaust.
In some cases retributive violence was used to excess. In limited cases tribes were hunted to extinction or driven to extinction through public policy written with full knowledge of the effects. History is tragic, but the extermination of natives wasnt a fair, nice, justified affair. It was a bloody mess, we won this territory by force of arms. America became an empire. We can acknowledge those facts and still salute our flag. We are humans, not perfect like God. Our creatioms always include the good with the evil.
I understand that there was bloodshed perpetuated by both sides. I do NOT agree that there was "genocide."
Many Indian tribes gratuitously killed Indians from other tribes long before whites arrived, and Indians also attacked and killed whites.
Indians weren't "natives" to America either. They also migrated to this land, and there were other people here before them.
Indian tribes lived on some isolated spots of land in this vast area we now know as the U.S. They never took ownership of the whole area, the tribes were not unified, they had no central government, the Indians, as a people, had no established borders, they had no claim to the whole area of the U.S., they never developed anything in this vast land that remotely indicated that this whole area was "taken," and they did nothing to make this land into a country. Furthermore, it was still a time of exploration, settlement, and development in this planet, and the strongest, the most capable, and most effective took over every land they could. The truth is that the Indians did NOT have a country, did NOT have borders, and this land was completely undeveloped, which suggested that it was NOT taken. If it hadn't been the Europeans to settle in America (reserving land for the Indians), to develop it, and turn it into a country with borders, it would have been the Chinese or the Arabs, and then there would indeed have been genocide, the Indians would either have all been killed, or the few left would have no land for themselves and would all be forced to be Muslims.
White people have recognized the Indian's rights to some of the land since the beginning, and this is still true today. There was conflict with some tribes and whites attacked Indians who attacked them and were dangerous to them. I'm sure there were some white people who hated Indians just for existing and/or who were particularly cruel to them, but they don't represent the attitude of most white people at any time, don't represent government policy at any time, and don't qualify to say that whites, in general, committed genocide of Indians in general.
I know, I was just speaking in terms of Cheadles thoughts ;)
They were lucky it was the white man that conquered them. If it was some other civilization, they would have never been given their reservation. Seeing how they treat other tribes, they almost died how they lived.
Exterminated. Taken as slaves and sacrificed. Erased from history.
You're in deep trouble if you haven't discovered/invented the wheel and are just prancing around land rich in resources and space. The Arabs would have loved conquering Native America.
This is hard to watch. Don thought he knew the bogeyman. He didn't. We see on camera the exact moment when his worldview collapses.
People of all colors and origins have the potential to be and do GOOD as well as EVIL. Jewish kapos in the Nazi concentration camps were as brutal as their guards. Arabs held slaves for centuries. Many of the slaves ended up in America, sold to white folks. Native Americans aren't just genetically good people. Each of us have to deserve our status in the world. Only simple-minded people, like the current leftists, forget this.
but wait, i thought the natives were peaceful hippies who loved animals? Oh right, right, barbarous savages, makes sense now.
Or just humans doing what humans always do: form up into tribes and wage eternal low scale war against each other.
OK, fine, but I still hate whitey! And y'all still better gibs muh reprashuns!
Hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!..........Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!
Lol I like how they both (Cheadle and the host) try to spin it as "WHITE MAN STILL BAD".
Pathetic.
I wonder how many white folks here would discovery that they are the ancestors of indentured servants from Ireland or England? How many fell under the flag of some feudal Lord that basically owned them? How many Chinese here today come from Coolies that were basically slaves who built the railroads? etc.
We all come from some place or time where things were screwed up BY TODAY'S STANDARDS. Those caps are important. The SJW's of today insist on judging folks from history based upon standards which they did not have. They worked from the rule book that was valid for their time and place. Was evil done? Sure.
Needs more upvotes. This revisionism has been pushed by the left since the 60's when the Dems switched tactics from cruel overlords to pushing black victimhood. Quite the trick LBJ and it worked politically. During the Depression through the 50's, despite Jim Crow, black out of wedlock birthrate and literacy rates were only a few percentage points behind whites. Then the Dems screwed them over, again.
Good Luck getting reparations from the Indians..
You might hit it big at the casino...
This is what you get when you whipe history from the history books. "wHaT dO yOu MeAn InDiAnS oWnDeD sLaYvEz? oNlY wHiTe MaN oWnDeD sLaYvEz!"
also Native Americans were not killed off by genocide
Native Americans are not a single group of people, they never saw themselves as such ..they spoke different languages had different cultures, had different physical features and lived all across the North American continent; saying our country was founded on the Genocide of Indians is wrong because Native Tribes often allied themselves with the US in war against other native tribes..so if it was genocide then according to liberal logic Native Americans committed genocide against themselves ??
90% of the Native American population was killed of by the accidental transmission of disease when European explorers, hired by European monarchs arrived in the new world...The U.S.A was founded hundreds of years later...liberals will often fire back , it was intentional transmission GENOCIDE!! they scream...they are often citing instances when anglos at war with tribes utilized disease as a bio-weapon to kill tribes they were at war with..this is a war crime...genocide however? no ..again 90% of native population was destroyed by european powers long before the USA was ever founded...
Native Americans were not considered U.S citizens...Jews in Germany were citizens and not engaged in war with Germany...Native Americans and Anglo Americans WERE AT WAR with one another ..both sides committed atrocities ..Native Americans targeted settlers and USA targeted Native villages..both were wrong but that's how it was then..or was it? During ww2 Japan and Germany targeted non military targets as did USA..did USA attempt genocide of Germans and Japanese? no they were at total war
If Native Americans were subjected to Genocide why were they not all killed off when they lost the Indian wars against the USA? only reason jews were spared was because the Germans lost...but USA won the Indian wars..so why are Natives still here if USA was genocidal ? They were not that's why
Did USA massacre many native american tribes? yes...but their is a distinction between massacres that occur during total war and strait up government backed genocide...I rest my case with the fact that Native American tribes often allied themselves with the USA, for protection and revenge, against hyper-aggressive enemy tribes...so if you say Native Americans experienced genocide then you must also say that Native Americans committed genocide against Native Americans....
Its important to remember no leftist arguments are sincere. They are always just a play for power and reality does not matter to them. When they speak to people outside their ideological bubble - its their demand that you capitulate to their "educated" perspective .
God bless America, That man is now in the wealthiest 1% of the world. Not bad three generations down from Indian slaves.
"the few..."
Do a little reading, and see precisely how few white people actually owned slaves.
Triple Victim +1,000 Oppression Points!
This is why we need a hard reset on what all actually gets taught in schools these days. Hardly anybody ever learns about all the other nations and all the other sets of people who owned slaves, or how much longer those slave trades lasted compared to what was going on with the US. Of course, with a system chock full of commies and woke morons, I don’t see it happening anytime soon.
Idk why native americans shy away from their heritage. If my grandpappy was sacrificing virgins to the blood gods and rode on a pale horse to the throne of skulls, I'd be rocking it and milking that infamy for all it's worth. Imagine being a badass that no man can kill, stealing women from cucks and getting high on peyote all day. That's so metal Lemmy is regretting not writing a song about it in his grave right now.
Let me get this straight: The US Government forced the Chickasaw to free their slaves?
The same government that forced half of its states to free their slaves?
The same government that is accused of “systemic racism”?
My sides are hurting. OMFG.
Which show is this from?
Henry Louis Gates's Finding Your Roots