Mehdi Hasan nails it on MLK and CRT.

Yes, others were involved, but slavery in North America began in 1619.

 

Hey!! This was YOUR chart!! Now you want to move the goalposts

 

Yes it does

No it's not

Not relevant

Yeah, just forget about all the Jim Crow and segregation and police butality and all that jazz right? After all, YOU didn't do it.

Right, no matter how many are put in your way simply for you skin pigment.

You mean other than denying that they still exist and you've given up the fight.

Already answered that question

 

Again it's right there in the article that YOU posted a graph from. There are hundreds more out there.

It only lasted 89 years!!! Where do you get this stuff. Get serious.

 

Brilliant!!! Your assertion is proven wrong so you brush it off as meaningless. Because you can't provide facts to back what you sayy our opinion is fast becoming irrelevant.

 

That doesn't make any sense. The generations of people that had slaves before 1776 and continued afterwards.

 

British, Spanish, Portuguese and French under those those government NOT the United States and the United States nor it's peoples is responsible for those governments.

Ahhh.............nope

Ahhhh.....nope

In the United States the country that ended it here. Do the math.

So spare us the white privilege claims.

Yes it is

It's all relevant

The discussion was about slavery, that being said Democrat Jim Crow and Democrat segregation was ended almost 60 years, it actually began 70 years ago but the CRA signed 60 years ago. Actually I fought to end it.

Can whites say that now that government supports black privilege?

What fight?

Can you give me some specificity?

 

The statement to which I was responding was about the United States.

"Yeah, but that's not the real comparison with US slavery. US slavery was forced labor."

The United States is not responsible for the countries and government which ruled before. The United States has no moral or legal obligation to correct asserted wrongs by those countries and governments.

 

The United States is the heir to all that happened in what is now US territory from 1607 forward. My own ancestors arrived around 1675. There's no record they ever owned slaves, but they certainly lived in a society in which slaveholding was permitted. As far as I'm concerned that experience is legitimately included in our national history.

 

FALSE. The United States did not exist then. Almost everyone then live in a society where slaveholding was permitted, there is hardly a place on earth where slavery has never existed and LOTs where slavery was FAR AND ABOVE more prevalent and more brutal and it still exist today in parts of the world. The current trend is to present slavery as something the United States invented and all things slavery are United States. Any study or world history shows otherwise. Slavery in the United States was a minor blip on the history of world slavery.

 

That's almost all irrelevant to the point I made. Yes, slavery goes back many thousands of years and was nearly universal. So what?

 

THAT is revisionist history at it's finest.
If that is true, then why didn't "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.-......." abolish slavery at that time? Was that the fault of Britian, France, Spain and Portugal? No, it was not. In fact, Jefferson had written a clause into the Declaration of Independence specically on the subject and it was taken out.

 

Like I said, it's right there in the article......but you never read it, did you.

 

Ahhh......nope.
The fact that every race has been enslaved is not relevant to the point of blacks in the US. You have a Masters in whataboutism.

 

No, the discussion is about CRT and you have twisted into a discussion about slavery because you think that the problems of blacks ended with the Civil War and yet you say that you understand their plight and you "fought" for it, yet somewhere you gave up the fight and flipped 180 degrees to "black privlege". That is sad.
Oh, and by the way, it's not "Democrat" segregation.....it was Confederate segregation. That's like saying the KKK is "Democrat".

 

No, because your premise is wrong. There is no "black privilege". There is the idea to make the playing field level. Ask a woman to explain it to you.

 

For equality. It only exists on paper, not practice.

 

Already did

 

That may be, but show me a nation that had a Civil War over it other than the US.

 

That is ACTUAL history. Why didn't the British abolish here when they did in the homeland? Had the DoI freed african slaves there would have been no DoI. It and the Constitution set up for the eventual end of slavery which last only those few years comparatively as I demonstrated.

 

Yea and 14% to 12% is meaningless and differences are not based on the color of skin, behavior.

 

You want equity not equality. I bet you can't even define what is equality nor explain how if we had this equality how it would manifest itself, what would be different?

 

Of course there is when it is easier to get into a college for instance or you will be appointed to the Supreme Court because of your blackness or be chosen to be a running mate for VP because of your blackness or be given a job because of your blackness or be able to have your own college based on your blackness or your own clubs or your own school outings all based on the your blackness. NONE of those privileges being allowed to whites due to their whiteness.

So how long does that privilege have to exist before you call it even?

 

I wouldn't say the left fought for CRT being taught in schools. Most of us just scratched our heads at the latest right-wing boogieman and went about our day. Of course, there are those on the left who enjoy their own boogiemen too, like gun owners or the people who haven't yet memorized the 85 new genders that were invented last year. So by no means is this a right-wing phenomenon. But like all boogiemen invented to rile people up, this one is just as dumb as the next one.

 

And CRT is not about slavery? ROFLMAO. The particular portion of the discussion was about slavery. I wasn't old enough to fight about slavery, I was old enough to fight for civil rights and desegregation. Those fights, Dr. King's goals did not include black privilege as we now see. And yes it was Democrats segregation after the Civil War ended. And yes KKK was Democrat when it was of any consequence. What party did the only official of the KKK belong to who served in the US Senate? From what party did the Dixiecrats evolve from and return to after they lost? What party did the political machine which enforced segregation and violation of voting rights in the South belong? Which party fought against civil rights and votings rights for almost 100 years?

BTW the SCOTUS is two case about black privilege in the fall.