Whites Should Not Be Forced To Live With Non-Whites

[Asclepias]

Whites also decided to leave Europe and take over the Americas. If they didn't want to live around non-whites they would have stayed in Europe.

 

[Pauli007001]

John Punch

If he is living in the USA against his will he should be very happy!!
At nearly 400 years old!!!
But why can't he leave?

Are you OK Paul? Do you have a problem with following the conversation? You shifted from my mention of whites bringing over Blacks to the US to now current times? John Punch was first an indentured servant then made a slave. He couldn't leave. What is it that escapes you about that?

Relevance.
We are talking about current events.
Slavery is over.
Forget about it, you were never a slave, I was never a slave owner.
How is that so difficult?
You can't get sympathy for something that never happened!!

 

[Pauli007001]

Whites also decided to leave Europe and take over the Americas. If they didn't want to live around non-whites they would have stayed in Europe.

They left because of the racist attitudes they learned from barbaric invaders from the south.
The ones that raped and murdered and enslaved Europeans.
Those violent warlike Africans.

 

[hjmick]

What in the hell is with the rise in racism on this board lately? It's fucking disgusting.

 

[Asclepias]

If he is living in the USA against his will he should be very happy!!
At nearly 400 years old!!!
But why can't he leave?

Are you OK Paul? Do you have a problem with following the conversation? You shifted from my mention of whites bringing over Blacks to the US to now current times? John Punch was first an indentured servant then made a slave. He couldn't leave. What is it that escapes you about that?

Relevance.
We are talking about current events.
Slavery is over.
Forget about it, you were never a slave, I was never a slave owner.
How is that so difficult?
You can't get sympathy for something that never happened!!

Oh I get it. You are saying that now that Blacks cant be enslaved anymore physically you would like them to leave? Sorry we put in too much work. You leave and go back to Europe if you dont like it here.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Aye yi yi. I skimmed some of what that person wrote but got dizzy from all the eye rolling I was doing.

To make it simple, in general blacks want to live among whites but whites don't want to live around blacks.

Then they should have never invaded Africa. Or abducted slaves.

To engage in the slave trade, you obviously need slaves. So how did White Europeans acquire their slaves in the first place? The image usually promoted is of ships of White slave traders pulling ashore in Africa, storming a local village and violently kidnapping the inhabitants to sell on as slaves.

The reality, however, is much less dramatic. But what is shocking is how the truth of the matter is never discussed and is airbrushed from the history lessons. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of Black African slaves were sold to the White slavers by Black Africans themselves.

The notion of White slavers establishing themselves in Africa and carrying out raids on villages is simply not feasible. Europeans were highly prone to the many diseases present along the West African coast such as Malaria, dysentery and yellow fever. Attempts to make a base in Africa for any amount of time would have left them open to severe ill health and seriously threatened their lives. Africa was not known as the “White man’s grave” for nothing.

African slave traders discouraged Europeans from entering into the interior of Africa because they themselves wanted to supply the slaves and thus maximise their profits. The European slavers were happy to go along with this because it was much cheaper, and held less risk of disease, than attempting to find the resources to capture the many slaves they needed themselves. It was much easier to give the Africans guns with which they could fight the wars between themselves that ensured such a rich supply of slaves.

 

[Asclepias]

To make it simple, in general blacks want to live among whites but whites don't want to live around blacks.

Then they should have never invaded Africa. Or abducted slaves.

To engage in the slave trade, you obviously need slaves. So how did White Europeans acquire their slaves in the first place? The image usually promoted is of ships of White slave traders pulling ashore in Africa, storming a local village and violently kidnapping the inhabitants to sell on as slaves.

The reality, however, is much less dramatic. But what is shocking is how the truth of the matter is never discussed and is airbrushed from the history lessons. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of Black African slaves were sold to the White slavers by Black Africans themselves.

The notion of White slavers establishing themselves in Africa and carrying out raids on villages is simply not feasible. Europeans were highly prone to the many diseases present along the West African coast such as Malaria, dysentery and yellow fever. Attempts to make a base in Africa for any amount of time would have left them open to severe ill health and seriously threatened their lives. Africa was not known as the “White man’s grave” for nothing.

African slave traders discouraged Europeans from entering into the interior of Africa because they themselves wanted to supply the slaves and thus maximise their profits. The European slavers were happy to go along with this because it was much cheaper, and held less risk of disease, than attempting to find the resources to capture the many slaves they needed themselves. It was much easier to give the Africans guns with which they could fight the wars between themselves that ensured such a rich supply of slaves.

That was a funny but useless post. It really doesn't matter how the slaves became slaves. They were brought here by Europeans. Therefore the Europeans must have wanted to live among them. If they have changed their minds they should go back to Europe.

 

[High_Gravity]

Nobodies being forced to live with anyone last time I checked, if the demographics of a certain area don't suit you, you are free to pack up and move.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Then they should have never invaded Africa. Or abducted slaves.

To engage in the slave trade, you obviously need slaves. So how did White Europeans acquire their slaves in the first place? The image usually promoted is of ships of White slave traders pulling ashore in Africa, storming a local village and violently kidnapping the inhabitants to sell on as slaves.

The reality, however, is much less dramatic. But what is shocking is how the truth of the matter is never discussed and is airbrushed from the history lessons. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of Black African slaves were sold to the White slavers by Black Africans themselves.

The notion of White slavers establishing themselves in Africa and carrying out raids on villages is simply not feasible. Europeans were highly prone to the many diseases present along the West African coast such as Malaria, dysentery and yellow fever. Attempts to make a base in Africa for any amount of time would have left them open to severe ill health and seriously threatened their lives. Africa was not known as the “White man’s grave” for nothing.

African slave traders discouraged Europeans from entering into the interior of Africa because they themselves wanted to supply the slaves and thus maximise their profits. The European slavers were happy to go along with this because it was much cheaper, and held less risk of disease, than attempting to find the resources to capture the many slaves they needed themselves. It was much easier to give the Africans guns with which they could fight the wars between themselves that ensured such a rich supply of slaves.

That was a funny but useless post. It really doesn't matter how the slaves became slaves. They were brought here by Europeans. Therefore the Europeans must have wanted to live among them. If they have changed their minds they should go back to Europe.

Pay no attention to it, it's just evidence that shows you to be the liar that you are.

I guess you don't remember your claim that whites kidnapped blacks and brought them over here as slaves. But then again, liars rarely remember the lies they've told.

 

[Asclepias]

To engage in the slave trade, you obviously need slaves. So how did White Europeans acquire their slaves in the first place? The image usually promoted is of ships of White slave traders pulling ashore in Africa, storming a local village and violently kidnapping the inhabitants to sell on as slaves.

The reality, however, is much less dramatic. But what is shocking is how the truth of the matter is never discussed and is airbrushed from the history lessons. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of Black African slaves were sold to the White slavers by Black Africans themselves.

The notion of White slavers establishing themselves in Africa and carrying out raids on villages is simply not feasible. Europeans were highly prone to the many diseases present along the West African coast such as Malaria, dysentery and yellow fever. Attempts to make a base in Africa for any amount of time would have left them open to severe ill health and seriously threatened their lives. Africa was not known as the “White man’s grave” for nothing.

African slave traders discouraged Europeans from entering into the interior of Africa because they themselves wanted to supply the slaves and thus maximise their profits. The European slavers were happy to go along with this because it was much cheaper, and held less risk of disease, than attempting to find the resources to capture the many slaves they needed themselves. It was much easier to give the Africans guns with which they could fight the wars between themselves that ensured such a rich supply of slaves.

That was a funny but useless post. It really doesn't matter how the slaves became slaves. They were brought here by Europeans. Therefore the Europeans must have wanted to live among them. If they have changed their minds they should go back to Europe.

Pay no attention to it, it's just evidence that shows you to be the liar that you are.

I guess you don't remember your claim that whites kidnapped blacks and brought them over here as slaves. But then again, liars rarely remember the lies they've told.

Whites did kidnap Africans and bring them over. Your website doesn't change that. I can produce websites that dispute yours but its not really a question in my mind. You must be stupid to think I would even believe that crap. Your post is useless and not even on point. Get on point son.

 

[MikeK]

Aye yi yi. I skimmed some of what that person wrote but got dizzy from all the eye rolling I was doing.

To make it simple, in general blacks want to live among whites but whites don't want to live around blacks.

Let’s make it even simpler:

Only ignorant, fearful, hateful racists such as you don’t want to live among Blacks; everyone else doesn’t care.

In spite of what some academically indoctrinated or simply patronizing proponents of political correctness will suggest it is the natural impulse of all living and sensate creatures, including humans, to gravitate to that which is, and to they who are, most comfortably familiar to them.

I was raised in the Brooklyn of the 1940s, '50s, and '60s. I can't speak for today but back then Brooklyn was known as a "city of neighborhoods" and was distinctly divided into ethnic communities: Bensonhurst was inhabited almost exclusively by Italians and that neighborhood was unmistakably Italian. The names of most stores were Italian. Stores had window signs in English and Italian. If you walked past a grocery store you smelled provolone and pepperoni -- and in summer there always was Italian music coming from somewhere.

A similar situation existed in Flatbush, which was predominately Jewish: Hebrew signs in all the stores. Jewish temples, Hassids walking the streets, eat-in delicatessens that specialized in huge corned beef sandwiches and celery soda.

Park Slope was unmistakably Irish. There were taverns on every block on Seventh Avenue between Flatbush Avenue and Twentieth Street; Duffy & Harkins, Gallaghers, The Shamrock, O'Brien's, Toomey's, and more I can't recall.

Bay Ridge was home to Nordics and Germans. Ridgewood was all German. Bedford- Stuyvestant was the "colored" neighborhood -- which contained a sharply divided enclave of West Indians who generally kept to themselves and did not mix with ordinary "coloreds."

Jim Crow was alien to New York. There were no segregated public toilets or drinking fountains. Blacks were not excluded from any public places and there were no "White Only" signs. Nor were there "Italian Only," or "Irish Only," or "German Only" signs. But the sense of ethnic community prevailed and was very much taken for granted. People naturally gravitated to the place where they felt they belonged and where they were most comfortable.

There is a Chinatown in New York City. I never met a Chinese who chose to live anywhere but there. I understand the same situation exists in every other major American city -- and the choice is purely voluntary.

 

[High_Gravity]

To make it simple, in general blacks want to live among whites but whites don't want to live around blacks.

Let’s make it even simpler:

Only ignorant, fearful, hateful racists such as you don’t want to live among Blacks; everyone else doesn’t care.

In spite of what some academically indoctrinated or simply patronizing proponents of political correctness will suggest it is the natural impulse of all living and sensate creatures, including humans, to gravitate to that which is, and to they who are, most comfortably familiar to them.

I was raised in the Brooklyn of the 1940s, '50s, and '60s. I can't speak for today but back then Brooklyn was known as a "city of neighborhoods" and was distinctly divided into ethnic communities: Bensonhurst was inhabited almost exclusively by Italians and that neighborhood was unmistakably Italian. The names of most stores were Italian. Stores had window signs in English and Italian. If you walked past a grocery store you smelled provolone and pepperoni -- and in summer there always was Italian music coming from somewhere.

A similar situation existed in Flatbush, which was predominately Jewish: Hebrew signs in all the stores. Jewish temples, Hassids walking the streets, eat-in delicatessens that specialized in huge corned beef sandwiches and celery soda.

Park Slope was unmistakably Irish. There were taverns on every block on Seventh Avenue between Flatbush Avenue and Twentieth Street; Duffy & Harkins, Gallaghers, The Shamrock, O'Brien's, Toomey's, and more I can't recall.

Bay Ridge was home to Nordics and Germans. Ridgewood was all German. Bedford- Stuyvestant was the "colored" neighborhood -- which contained a sharply divided enclave of West Indians who generally kept to themselves and did not mix with ordinary "coloreds."

Jim Crow was alien to New York. There were no segregated public toilets or drinking fountains. Blacks were not excluded from any public places and there were no "White Only" signs. Nor were there "Italian Only," or "Irish Only," or "German Only" signs. But the sense of ethnic community prevailed and was very much taken for granted. People naturally gravitated to the place where they felt they belonged and where they were most comfortable.

There is a Chinatown in New York City. I never met a Chinese who chose to live anywhere but there. I understand the same situation exists in every other major American city -- and the choice is purely voluntary.

That depends, not every city is as diverse as New York and there are not as many choices. There is no Chinatown where I live so the Chinese have to live with people of other races. New York is the exception not the rule.

 

[Asclepias]

To make it simple, in general blacks want to live among whites but whites don't want to live around blacks.

Let’s make it even simpler:

Only ignorant, fearful, hateful racists such as you don’t want to live among Blacks; everyone else doesn’t care.

In spite of what some academically indoctrinated or simply patronizing proponents of political correctness will suggest it is the natural impulse of all living and sensate creatures, including humans, to gravitate to that which is, and to they who are, most comfortably familiar to them.

I was raised in the Brooklyn of the 1940s, '50s, and '60s. I can't speak for today but back then Brooklyn was known as a "city of neighborhoods" and was distinctly divided into ethnic communities: Bensonhurst was inhabited almost exclusively by Italians and that neighborhood was unmistakably Italian. The names of most stores were Italian. Stores had window signs in English and Italian. If you walked past a grocery store you smelled provolone and pepperoni -- and in summer there always was Italian music coming from somewhere.

A similar situation existed in Flatbush, which was predominately Jewish: Hebrew signs in all the stores. Jewish temples, Hassids walking the streets, eat-in delicatessens that specialized in huge corned beef sandwiches and celery soda.

Park Slope was unmistakably Irish. There were taverns on every block on Seventh Avenue between Flatbush Avenue and Twentieth Street; Duffy & Harkins, Gallaghers, The Shamrock, O'Brien's, Toomey's, and more I can't recall.

Bay Ridge was home to Nordics and Germans. Ridgewood was all German. Bedford- Stuyvestant was the "colored" neighborhood -- which contained a sharply divided enclave of West Indians who generally kept to themselves and did not mix with ordinary "coloreds."

Jim Crow was alien to New York. There were no segregated public toilets or drinking fountains. Blacks were not excluded from any public places and there were no "White Only" signs. Nor were there "Italian Only," or "Irish Only," or "German Only" signs. But the sense of ethnic community prevailed and was very much taken for granted. People naturally gravitated to the place where they felt they belonged and where they were most comfortable.

There is a Chinatown in New York City. I never met a Chinese who chose to live anywhere but there. I understand the same situation exists in every other major American city -- and the choice is purely voluntary.

I think that is more a result of the socialization we get now. I dont think it is as natural as people think it is. Greeks and Romans really did not do this. There were Black Greeks and Romans in important positions in both societies.

 

[MikeK]

Whites did kidnap Africans and bring them over. Your website doesn't change that. I can produce websites that dispute yours but its not really a question in my mind. You must be stupid to think I would even believe that crap. Your post is useless and not even on point. Get on point son.

You are quite mistaken.

the simple fact is if slave traders, who were mainly Dutch, Portugese and Arab, had ventured into Africa to kidnap Africans they could not have prevailed over the fierce African tribes, including the Zulu, Watusi, Ibo, et. al, who promptly would have slaughtered or enslaved them. The fact is African slaves were prisoners of other Africans who sold them to the slave traders, typically at places called "slave castles," many of which were situated in an area where the Niger river empties into the Atlantic. Africa's Slave Castles The slave traders did not venture inland and did not kidnap the slaves they transported and sold.

An historic fact which most Blacks find uncomfortable and seek via deception to avoid is those Black African slaves who were imported to America were enslaved by other Black Africans and sold to traders who transported them to America (and other places) to be sold at auctions.

 

[Asclepias]

Whites did kidnap Africans and bring them over. Your website doesn't change that. I can produce websites that dispute yours but its not really a question in my mind. You must be stupid to think I would even believe that crap. Your post is useless and not even on point. Get on point son.

You are quite mistaken.

the simple fact is if slave traders, who were mainly Dutch, Portugese and Arab, had ventured into Africa to kidnap Africans they could not have prevailed over the fierce African tribes, including the Zulu, Watusi, Ibo, et. al, who promptly would have slaughtered or enslaved them. The fact is African slaves were prisoners of other Africans who sold them to the slave traders, typically at places called "slave castles," many of which were situated in an area where the Niger river empties into the Atlantic. Africa's Slave Castles The slave traders did not venture inland and did not kidnap the slaves they transported and sold.

An historic fact which most Blacks find uncomfortable and seek via deception to avoid is those Black African slaves who were imported to America were enslaved by other Black Africans and sold to traders who transported them to America (and other places) to be sold at auctions.

I'm not mistaken at all. The Africans knew that the Europeans had superior weapons and withdrew from the coast. Look up Goree Island and you will find that the Portuguese built it because there was no one there. It was vacant. They even had a dungeon to keep the children in. That doesn't mean some Africans did not sell other Africans to both Arabs and Europeans. Ghana has actually apologized for it. Make no mistake about it though, Europeans did kidnap Africans by going into the interior. Anyone telling you different is trying to deflect blame. No one made Europeans buy the slaves and treat them like they did nor bring them over to the Americas.

 

[MikeK]

I'm not mistaken at all. The Africans knew that the Europeans had superior weapons and withdrew from the coast. Look up Goree Island and you will find that the Portuguese built it because there was no one there. It was vacant. They even had a dungeon to keep the children in. That doesn't mean some Africans did not sell other Africans to both Arabs and Europeans. Ghana has actually apologized for it. Make no mistake about it though, Europeans did kidnap Africans by going into the interior. Anyone telling you different is trying to deflect blame. No one made Europeans buy the slaves and treat them like they did nor bring them over to the Americas.

There are many available sources of this information. The most credibly authoritative I picked from is the U.K.'s Guardian.

(Excerpt)

Traditional African rulers whose ancestors collaborated with European and Arab slave traders should follow Britain and the United States by publicly saying sorry, according to human rights organisations.

The Civil Rights Congress of Nigeria has written to tribal chiefs saying: "We cannot continue to blame the white men, as Africans, particularly the traditional rulers, are not blameless."

The appeal has reopened a sensitive debate over the part some chiefs played in helping to capture their fellow Africans and sell them into bondage as part of the transatlantic slave trade.

The congress argued that the ancestors of the chiefs had helped to raid and kidnap from defenceless communities and traded captives to Europeans. They should now apologise to "put a final seal to the history of slave trade", it said.

"In view of the fact that the Americans and Europe have accepted the cruelty of their roles and have forcefully apologised, it would be logical, reasonable and humbling if African traditional rulers ... [can] accept blame and formally apologise to the descendants of the victims of their collaborative and exploitative slave trade."

(Close)

African chiefs urged to apologise for slave trade | World news | The Guardian

 

[ScienceRocks]

I don't believe anyone should be forced to live with anyone.

Do you agree?

 

[MikeK]

[...]

Make no mistake about it though, Europeans did kidnap Africans by going into the interior. Anyone telling you different is trying to deflect blame.

[...]

Please post an authoritatively credible link to that information. I'm interested.

 

[Asclepias]

[...]

Make no mistake about it though, Europeans did kidnap Africans by going into the interior. Anyone telling you different is trying to deflect blame.

[...]

Please post an authoritatively credible link to that information. I'm interested.

That sounds to me like you only accept certain sources for information. Is this correct? What to you would be credible?

Whites did Africans the same way they did Native Americans. They gained their trust by trading and developing snitches that told white slave traders when it was safe to attack unprotected villages. You have to remember that the Europeans had guns. You also have to remember that it was financially smarter and less time consuming to take the Africans forcibly than continue to trade. Dont fall for the hype.

 

[chikenwing]

Let’s make it even simpler:

Only ignorant, fearful, hateful racists such as you don’t want to live among Blacks; everyone else doesn’t care.

In the eyes of God, we are all created equal. We should not be having any discussion on segregation of any type. We should instead be asking forgiveness for past injustices in this regard.

Left to their own devices most groups segregate themselves.

Go to any cafeteria at any random business i.e. hospital, construction site, school.. etc.... and you will see that different race and ethnicities generally sit and engage with their kind. I'll concede there are exceptions.

Its just more fun to stir the pot for some.