[New Poll] What is your race?

[Tekeristan]

If you're white, you do benefit every day. If you're not white, you may still benefit from it, but either way it's a good thing to know about.

How the Hell do I benefit from the enslavement of someone from the 18th century? You're off your rocker.

The idea is based off of the society and the structures and thoughts it built over time.

You don't directly benefit from it. You don't have any implication in it. You're just born into it, and it's not your fault at all.

To go over it further, after the release of slaves after a century of free labor - they generally had nothing to start with, in fact many actually stayed in the plantations they previously worked at and worked for nigh un-existant wages. The stretch of social inequality allowed worker exploitation to continue for a long while.
Generally that kind of exploitation is long gone. However different acts have occured in the past. Society is generally segregated rich and poor, and a strong percentage of poor are black. Housing areas are reflected on this to, there were 'red zones' for development, and so forth. Those acts are also gone, but the impact they have created still lingers.

Pretty much just general social ladder stuff. I don't know how I feel about it either, since I don't want to be blamed for whatever much some dirt hats did a few centuries ago. Ideally we'd just lift everyone out of poverty, but the world isn't nice like that.

[NeuPolska]

In any case, it's a less morally abhorrent form, since to be a prisoner of war, you'd have to fight in a war to begin with. You weren't just some innocent person, you were a warrior that got captured. In those times it was simply an occupational hazard. It certainly wasn't a racial issue.

What do you mean? That's not true at all. You act like they didn't raid villages and towns for captives back then.

There were ransoms involved according to that link, which implies captured knights, nobles, etc. A lowly peasant would not have been ransomed off like that.

In any case, it's a less morally abhorrent form, since to be a prisoner of war, you'd have to fight in a war to begin with. You weren't just some innocent person, you were a warrior that got captured. In those times it was simply an occupational hazard. It certainly wasn't a racial issue.

Conscription and levies are a thing.
In fact they were a very common thing.

Conscription is a more modern invention. Levies were common, but that doesn't change that once they're armed and willing to fight, they become warriors, speaking broadly. They're combatants.

[United Islamic Commonwealth]

What do you mean? That's not true at all. You act like they didn't raid villages and towns for captives back then.

There were ransoms involved according to that link, which implies captured knights, nobles, etc. A lowly peasant would not have been ransomed off like that.

Conscription and levies are a thing.
In fact they were a very common thing.

Conscription is a more modern invention. Levies were common, but that doesn't change that once they're armed and willing to fight, they become warriors, speaking broadly. They're combatants.

And that link also said that the slaves were mainly those who the ransom was paid for and were not returned. And ransoms were paid for all kinds of people. Not just high born.

[Minzerland II]

Not that this detracts from your point, but I feel compelled to point this out.

That's serfdom, I wouldn't compare it to slavery. I can see some similarities, but it's still not the same thing.

It says that slavery was supplanted by serfdom.

By being born you are influencing and changing it, you're its continuation. I am proud of my heritage because I had inherited a legacy that I will continue to add to.

Right. Conscripted into the act, more less, is what it appears to me. I didn't ask to be this way, I wasn't even given choice as far as my knowledge extends.

You weren't conscripted into anything. You aren't made to be proud of your heritage, you can be ashamed if you so please. You inherited that which was your ancestors, be that genetics, possessions, society and legacy.

Sure seems wrong to me to take claim on things I have had no impact or influence on and pass it as my own prestige.

Heck. I'm human. Can I just be proud with humanity instead?

But you do. You're it's continuation; your heritage doesn't stop with you, it goes on until it cannot go any further. You impact and influence it daily with your actions, your children and their children will have you as their heritage.

Yes.

[Major-Tom]

Is pasty white an option?

I believe the proper term is Irish.

Or a sorry ass Swede/German like me.

[NeuPolska]

There were ransoms involved according to that link, which implies captured knights, nobles, etc. A lowly peasant would not have been ransomed off like that.


Conscription is a more modern invention. Levies were common, but that doesn't change that once they're armed and willing to fight, they become warriors, speaking broadly. They're combatants.

And that link also said that the slaves were mainly those who the ransom was paid for and were not returned. And ransoms were paid for all kinds of people. Not just high born.

That doesn't change anything.

But for the second sentence (and third), would you be able to provide some examples? I'm going off of what I've learned through the years, and I've taken college-level courses on European history. I'd be interested in learning more, because it does not make sense for peasants to be ransomed, who would they be ransomed off to? At least with knights or nobles, you have families to take that up with, and families which have estates and thus wealth. Peasants don't have estates nor really wealth.

[The Founding Fatherland]

How the Hell do I benefit from the enslavement of someone from the 18th century? You're off your rocker.

The idea is based off of the society and the structures and thoughts it built over time.

You don't directly benefit from it. You don't have any implication in it. You're just born into it, and it's not your fault at all.

To go over it further, after the release of slaves after a century of free labor - they generally had nothing to start with, in fact many actually stayed in the plantations they previously worked at and worked for nigh un-existant wages. The stretch of social inequality allowed worker exploitation to continue for a long while.
Generally that kind of exploitation is long gone. However different acts have occured in the past. Society is generally segregated rich and poor, and a strong percentage of poor are black. Housing areas are reflected on this to, there were 'red zones' for development, and so forth. Those acts are also gone, but the impact they have created still lingers.

Pretty much just general social ladder stuff. I don't know how I feel about it either, since I don't want to be blamed for whatever much some dirt hats did a few centuries ago. Ideally we'd just lift everyone out of poverty, but the world isn't nice like that.

Well by his logic some random fisherman in a dirt poor village in West Africa is still being affected by the enslavement of a distant ancestor of his from 200 years ago.

It's nuts.

[Siornor]

How the Hell do I benefit from the enslavement of someone from the 18th century? You're off your rocker.

Obviously not a direct benefit, not as though you're making money off of that slave, but in a sense you are. The racial divides in America due to slavery were immense, and all the racial biases and discrimination everyone talks about today are a result of them. In the long history of race in America, slavery disintegrated but it gave way to other things, and its effects are still in effect.

In the late 1800s and early 1900s, many former slaves and their families migrated north to Chicago. Due to a variety of complex factors that were all derived from white people not wanting to live around black people, whites in Chicago maintained and grew wealth and ran the city, while the majority of blacks were forced into impoverished neighborhoods where they had no opportunity to reach the same heights as whites. If I'm a white guy living in lincoln park, I might have the same potential as a black guy from south shore, but if I graduated high school and he didn't because he didn't have the right support system and his school didn't have the funding to provide him the same education I got, I might end up making a lot of money working at a company where he's a janitor. He might have done just as well in the position, if not better, than I do, but he was never granted that opportunity because he was born into a community borne from the dregs of slavery (something I would never have to face just because I'm white). It's not my fault that that unfairness happened, but I'm still undeniably benefitting from getting the job he never had a chance to get, and, by extension, benefitting from slavery.

(for the record, I'm only half white and i don't live in lincoln park)

[United Islamic Commonwealth]

And that link also said that the slaves were mainly those who the ransom was paid for and were not returned. And ransoms were paid for all kinds of people. Not just high born.

That doesn't change anything.

But for the second sentence (and third), would you be able to provide some examples? I'm going off of what I've learned through the years, and I've taken college-level courses on European history. I'd be interested in learning more, because it does not make sense for peasants to be ransomed, who would they be ransomed off to? At least with knights or nobles, you have families to take that up with, and families which have estates and thus wealth. Peasants don't have estates nor really wealth.

Not all of it could have been based off of wealth. A town or village could probably give a portion of its food stores in exchange for the return of some of its stolen townsfolk. And why are you so fixated on the POW part?

"Some people could become enslaved due to their inability to pay off their debts, and occasionally enslavement was used instead of a death sentence. Children of niewolni would also belong to that class."

[Tekeristan]

The idea is based off of the society and the structures and thoughts it built over time.

You don't directly benefit from it. You don't have any implication in it. You're just born into it, and it's not your fault at all.

To go over it further, after the release of slaves after a century of free labor - they generally had nothing to start with, in fact many actually stayed in the plantations they previously worked at and worked for nigh un-existant wages. The stretch of social inequality allowed worker exploitation to continue for a long while.
Generally that kind of exploitation is long gone. However different acts have occured in the past. Society is generally segregated rich and poor, and a strong percentage of poor are black. Housing areas are reflected on this to, there were 'red zones' for development, and so forth. Those acts are also gone, but the impact they have created still lingers.

Pretty much just general social ladder stuff. I don't know how I feel about it either, since I don't want to be blamed for whatever much some dirt hats did a few centuries ago. Ideally we'd just lift everyone out of poverty, but the world isn't nice like that.

Well by his logic some random fisherman in a dirt poor village in West Africa is still being affected by the enslavement of a distant ancestor of his from 200 years ago.

It's nuts.

In a sense? Probably. No one generally alive is to blame for it.
Is that an excuse to not try and level or fix things though? I dunno. That's debated.
No one just wants to be responsible for things they didn't do. That's understandable. Me too.

[Siornor]

To sum up my last long, long post now that I better understand what you're trying to say, this is a pretty common complaint from white people. No one is blaming you for being born into more than a black person. That's just the way it is. You had no more choice in the matter than they did, but it's unfair to them if you don't acknowledge the fact.

[Internationalist Bastard]

The idea is based off of the society and the structures and thoughts it built over time.

You don't directly benefit from it. You don't have any implication in it. You're just born into it, and it's not your fault at all.

To go over it further, after the release of slaves after a century of free labor - they generally had nothing to start with, in fact many actually stayed in the plantations they previously worked at and worked for nigh un-existant wages. The stretch of social inequality allowed worker exploitation to continue for a long while.
Generally that kind of exploitation is long gone. However different acts have occured in the past. Society is generally segregated rich and poor, and a strong percentage of poor are black. Housing areas are reflected on this to, there were 'red zones' for development, and so forth. Those acts are also gone, but the impact they have created still lingers.

Pretty much just general social ladder stuff. I don't know how I feel about it either, since I don't want to be blamed for whatever much some dirt hats did a few centuries ago. Ideally we'd just lift everyone out of poverty, but the world isn't nice like that.

Well by his logic some random fisherman in a dirt poor village in West Africa is still being affected by the enslavement of a distant ancestor of his from 200 years ago.

It's nuts.

Well, yes, Africa is still suffering horribly from colonialism

[The East Marches II]

I have beady eyes and a burning hatred of civilization, that's my race.

[Major-Tom]

I have beady eyes and a burning hatred of civilization, that's my race.

Turkish, gotcha.

[NeuPolska]

That doesn't change anything.

But for the second sentence (and third), would you be able to provide some examples? I'm going off of what I've learned through the years, and I've taken college-level courses on European history. I'd be interested in learning more, because it does not make sense for peasants to be ransomed, who would they be ransomed off to? At least with knights or nobles, you have families to take that up with, and families which have estates and thus wealth. Peasants don't have estates nor really wealth.

Not all of it could have been based off of wealth. A town or village could probably give a portion of its food stores in exchange for the return of some of its stolen townsfolk. And why are you so fixated on the POW part?

"Some people could become enslaved due to their inability to pay off their debts, and occasionally enslavement was used instead of a death sentence. Children of niewolni would also belong to that class."

Or the army could just march in and take the food stores. Or forage. I wouldn't say fixated, but I suppose I've been looking at it a bit too much.

Back then they couldn't exactly file for bankruptcy so I mean, they owe a debt, and they're working to repay it. Just a symptom of a less advanced society than we have now. I could relate the death sentence one to that as well.

[United Islamic Commonwealth]

Well, I don't think all white people are automatically to blame for slavery in anyway shape or form simply because they are white. The whole idea of white people having to directly pay a "reparation" to black people is idiotic. That money could be much better spent by putting it into the education system, mainly schools that are underfunded (predominantly in African American neighborhoods).

On the other hand, to deny that "white privilege" is a thing is also idiotic. A white person is much, much more likely to be treated better in the US than a POC. Stereotypes and prejudices ensure that.

[The East Marches II]

I have beady eyes and a burning hatred of civilization, that's my race.

Turkish, gotcha.

B T F O
T
F
O

brb gonna go drink myself to sleep

[United Islamic Commonwealth]

Not all of it could have been based off of wealth. A town or village could probably give a portion of its food stores in exchange for the return of some of its stolen townsfolk. And why are you so fixated on the POW part?

"Some people could become enslaved due to their inability to pay off their debts, and occasionally enslavement was used instead of a death sentence. Children of niewolni would also belong to that class."

Or the army could just march in and take the food stores. Or forage. I wouldn't say fixated, but I suppose I've been looking at it a bit too much.

Back then they couldn't exactly file for bankruptcy so I mean, they owe a debt, and they're working to repay it. Just a symptom of a less advanced society than we have now. I could relate the death sentence one to that as well.

So, then their children pay it, too? And their children's children? And theirs?

[Napkiraly]

Since the far-right is increasingly becoming hostile towards those of Anglo ancestry, I think it is safe to say that I am no longer white. While the precise race is in question, what is certain is that we are persons of colour and need to join our brothers and sisters against our white oppressors.

[NeuPolska]

Or the army could just march in and take the food stores. Or forage. I wouldn't say fixated, but I suppose I've been looking at it a bit too much.

Back then they couldn't exactly file for bankruptcy so I mean, they owe a debt, and they're working to repay it. Just a symptom of a less advanced society than we have now. I could relate the death sentence one to that as well.

So, then their children pay it, too? And their children's children? And theirs?

Can't really defend that one.

[Tekeristan]

Well, I don't think all white people are automatically to blame for slavery in anyway shape or form simply because they are white. The whole idea of white people having to directly pay a "reparation" to black people is idiotic. That money could be much better spent by putting it into the education system, mainly schools that are underfunded (predominantly in African American neighborhoods).

On the other hand, to deny that "white privilege" is a thing is also idiotic. A white person is much, much more likely to be treated better in the US than a POC. Stereotypes and prejudices ensure that.

Pretty much the point, yea.

Normally you could just say that it's a class issue. Schools are funded based on local property taxes, thus it varies how much the local land around the school is worth, rather than the amount of students they have. It's a social issue in the sense that it's predominantly leaning towards one group than another, in part a consequence of historic activities that marginalized said group.
Ideally we would fix schools all around. But since we struggle with such ideas, making it a social issue is the next best thing, eh?

[Valgora]

Since the far-right is increasingly becoming hostile towards those of Anglo ancestry, I think it is safe to say that I am no longer white. While the precise race is in question, what is certain is that we are persons of colour and need to join our brothers and sisters against our white oppressors.

Emphasis mine.

[United Islamic Commonwealth]

Well, I don't think all white people are automatically to blame for slavery in anyway shape or form simply because they are white. The whole idea of white people having to directly pay a "reparation" to black people is idiotic. That money could be much better spent by putting it into the education system, mainly schools that are underfunded (predominantly in African American neighborhoods).

On the other hand, to deny that "white privilege" is a thing is also idiotic. A white person is much, much more likely to be treated better in the US than a POC. Stereotypes and prejudices ensure that.

Pretty much the point, yea.

Normally you could just say that it's a class issue. Schools are funded based on local property taxes, thus it varies how much the local land around the school is worth, rather than the amount of students they have. It's a social issue in the sense that it's predominantly leaning towards one group than another, in part a consequence of historic activities that marginalized said group.
Ideally we would fix schools all around. But since we struggle with such ideas, making it a social issue is the next best thing, eh?

And POC tend to be poorer than white people.

[Siornor]

Well, I don't think all white people are automatically to blame for slavery in anyway shape or form simply because they are white. The whole idea of white people having to directly pay a "reparation" to black people is idiotic. That money could be much better spent by putting it into the education system, mainly schools that are underfunded (predominantly in African American neighborhoods).

On the other hand, to deny that "white privilege" is a thing is also idiotic. A white person is much, much more likely to be treated better in the US than a POC. Stereotypes and prejudices ensure that.

I agree with this 100% and it's literally all I've been trying to say, but for some reason white people always think I'm trying to blame them for slavery and call them nazis when I say it.

[United Islamic Commonwealth]

Since the far-right is increasingly becoming hostile towards those of Anglo ancestry, I think it is safe to say that I am no longer white. While the precise race is in question, what is certain is that we are persons of colour and need to join our brothers and sisters against our white oppressors.

Emphasis mine.

He's trying to make a shitty joke and rolled -3 on delivery.