Pogo
Diamond Member
- Dec 7, 2012
- 123,708
- 22,749
saying that Europeans "invented" racism is like saying that the first European explorer that turned his musket on an indigenous person "invented" shooting natives.
Sure, you could say that, for what it's worth. But it's not worth much as it says nothing about why-shoot-the-indigenous in particular, as opposed to why-shoot-anybody.
On some level, you could technically make that claim, but there's nothing particularly inventive about turning an existing weapon on a new target, just as there's nothing particularly inventive about encouraging tribal hostilities based on a new set of criteria,
Again, true. But the fact that it's a "new" versus "old" target is, again, not the point. The point is causation --- why is that new target selected? And in this case that selection has nothing to do with shooting; rather it's the value judgment that race X, Y or Z is "inferior" to one's own. That's what racism means. It can then be expressed in myriad ways, including criteria for shooting. It may be simply internalized and not expressed at all. But I'm saying that value judgment is invented --- meaning put there where it didn't exist previously --- to rationalize the transAtlantic slave trade. Because without that rationalization, said traders would have to admit that human trafficking is immoral. And that, in turn, would have meant losing money.
Racism is not shooting or subjugating or enslaving. It's a value judgment.
particularly one that coincides with the general geographical distribution of world populations, and therefore already exists in all but name.
All this section says is that diverse races exist in diverse areas. We already know that.