That didn't last long. ABC Cancels Roseanne after tweet about Obama aid.

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,555
    149
    Columbus, OH
    Well, when certain races are property, some are citizens, and some are neither this sort of thing was pretty important. It could literally be the difference between a child inheriting the father's land vs the child being the property of the landowner. Remember slavery was big business in the Americas. Indian slaves first, then African slaves (who escaped in large numbers and set up their own "colonies" which then had to be negotiated with as some odd mix of sovereign nations made up of "property". See "Maroon" communities in South America.

    So, economics guided the "official race charts" in a way that doesn't enter the discussion today. The easiest way to justify owning another human is to "prove" they aren't really human. Then it's sort of like owning a particularly clever animal, much more morally tidy.

    *edit*

    Speaking of economics, the book I've been referring to cost $7.50 in 1854. $210 and change in today's money. The cost of textbooks has apparently been insane for longer than I would have thought.


    It's a bargain. Using 4% average inflation, rule of 72nds says price doubles every eighteen years

    (2018 - 1854) = 164
    164/18 = ~9.1
    2 ^ 9.1 = ~548.7
    548.7 x $7.50 = $4115.25
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    26,608
    113
    This thread has truly been eye opening.

    With the understanding I know I'm fascinated by things that are of no practical use other than knowing them, the book I've linked to is so interesting I'm reading the entire thing. It's pre-Origin of the Species, so "Survival of the Fittest" hasn't entered the scientific realm yet. I had no idea there was debate on if the "species" of mankind all sprung up independently or if "Adam" was of some proto-race and then people "evolved" (my word, not their word as it hadn't been invented yet, they phrase it as acted upon by the native plants, animals, and climate) and then got "locked" into their now-permanent form. "Esquimeauxs" look so similar to each other because there's so few different colors and types of large animals in the Arctic...that sort of thing.

    The grand problem...involves the common origin of races ; for upon the latter deduction hang not only certain religious dogmas, but the more practical question of equality and perfectibility of races - we say "more practical question," because, while Almighty Power, on the one hand, is not responsible to Man for the distinct origin of human races, these, on the other, are accountable to Him for the manner in which their delegated power is used towards each other. Whether an original diversity of races be admitted or not, the permanence of existing physical types will not be questioned by any (scientist) of the present day. Nor, by such (science), can the consequent permanence of moral and intellectual peculiarities be denied. The intellectual man is inseparable from the physical man ; and the nature of the one cannot be altered without a corresponding change in the other..." ...The truth of these propositions...wield the destinies of nations and races

    The book largely argues that either certain races were created inferior (no common beginning, each race springs up independently somehow or other) or that there's a common ancestor and some races are much more "perfected" than others and the others are locked in their hopelessly inferior state. Why were the Egyptians building a great civilization before the birth of Christ, but "for 4,000 years" the Africans remain "savages" if not due to race? (Note Egyptians are not "African types" despite being on the continent of Africa) I've seen the book referenced, but never actually read it...so now I am. Just read the first chapter, it's a fascinating look into the construct of race and how slavery and the building of empires was so easily justified in that outlook. Also, what we'd consider a hybrid science-religion argument.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    26,608
    113
    In my defense, my schooling was primarily in engineering and later computer technology, so I really didn't have any history/anthropology/social sciences classes. Interesting stuff for sure.

    Seriously, very few people delve that deep into this stuff. And I don't know jack about engineering or not much more about computer technology. It's impossible to learn about everything.
     

    ArcadiaGP

    Wanderer
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Jun 15, 2009
    31,729
    113
    Indianapolis
    And here I thought Breton was just a fantasy race in The Elder Scrolls.

    Next you're going to tell me the President's an Argonian, and Orsimer are real.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    26,608
    113
    I'm considering this quote as a signature line:

    "..an Italian is not necessarily a rogue because he wears a mustache."
     

    Leadeye

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 19, 2009
    37,726
    113
    .
    I find old graveyards in my explorations of the local forest. This guy was a freed slave so he was defiantly African, born before the American revolution.
     

    Leadeye

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 19, 2009
    37,726
    113
    .
    Leadeye, did you research this guy to find out he was a freed slave?

    Yes I did. He comes from Virginia originally, and I was able to piece together some of his story.When I find stones I try to reset them if damaged. This one had been moved a good distance by logging equipment some time in the past. We located his wife's stone and placed them close together where I assume his mortal remains must be and said a prayer. I like to keep on good terms with the local spirits, being Irish, German and Cherokee.
     

    KJQ6945

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Aug 5, 2012
    37,675
    149
    Texas
    Yes I did. He comes from Virginia originally, and I was able to piece together some of his story.When I find stones I try to reset them if damaged. This one had been moved a good distance by logging equipment some time in the past. We located his wife's stone and placed them close together where I assume his mortal remains must be and said a prayer. I like to keep on good terms with the local spirits, being Irish, German and Cherokee.
    That is a very cool story. I'm sure they have descendants that would love to see that stone. Just prior to the civil war, I doubt that property was much different than it is today.
     

    Leadeye

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 19, 2009
    37,726
    113
    .
    That is a very cool story. I'm sure they have descendants that would love to see that stone. Just prior to the civil war, I doubt that property was much different than it is today.

    Probably a farm as it's close to a spring. Like everything else here, it's completely forested over. He must have been a prosperous farmer as his stone is made of Hindostan Stone, a very durable local stone used for sharpening and mill stones. It would have commanded quite a premium over common limestone or local sandstone that you see many monuments in local cemeteries. He took his last name from his owner which was common when slaves were freed.
     
    Rating - 100%
    31   0   0
    Aug 4, 2017
    2,155
    113
    Fishers
    eSo3T1i.jpg
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,258
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Like BBI said, race is a social construct, primarily American. I had an African-Studies teacher, who was American, and light-skinned... obviously "black" to Americans. She was married to an African man, and when she first met her husbands family, they considered her white, as in truly caucasian.

    Then what should be done about the notion that color-blindness is a micro-agression? We can't have it both ways. Either race is a social construct, or it's not. If it's a social construct AND we can't be color blind, that's really confusing.

    I remember Bret Weinstein, evolutionary biologist, said that what we think of as race, is probably better described as lineage. So then, I think there's really no value in making drawing important distinctions between races in terms of physical attributes. But to the class of progressives today, I'm a racist for believing that. It seems most logical to me that my position is anti-racist. If I think race, or whatever we want to call the DNA part, should be viewed as mostly insignificant. Obviously there are some significant parts, like sickle cell anemia.

    Point is, I think the people who think "color-blindness" is racist, are the loudest right now. And they're not just saying color-blindness is racist, they're saying "racist" means white oppressors of blacks. That minorities can't be racist because prejudice + power = racist. And I hear a lot of white progressives I know personally repeating that nonsense. The sane whites and blacks who think that it's better not to care about race, need to be louder.

    One other thing, there's more to the social construct than what BBI said. It's not uniquely American. Maybe one could make a case that the concept could have originated here; I don't no. But one could make a better case that it's at least a "Western" idea. But the "more" to the social construct that I'm talking about is culture. And the cultural part certainly fits in better with the idea of lineage than race. Families become tribes and develop their own cultures. Tribes blend and cultures merge.

    So maybe it's worth talking more about culture than race. And I'll tell you this. Having lived in many different areas of the country, whites are really culturally diverse. I laugh every time someone talks about "white culture". Okay. Which one do you want to talk about? I can talk all day about the stark differences between, say Denver culture and Missippi culture. I'm not sure a Denver native could survive in Missippi. Probably a Missippi native could survive in Denver. Even Carolina culture is different from Missippi cuture. Coastal Carolina culture is different from Appalachian culture.

    Micro-aggression my ass.
     
    Top Bottom