America coming apart at the seams?

[tamada]

nothing more hysterical than scots & kiwis lecturing with righteous indignation on the unfair, racist treatment of blacks in other countries

when the percentage of blacks in both scotland
and new zealand . . . hovers at roughly 1 %

While I appreciate your efforts to suggest that the Scots don't have a dog in this fight, don't forget that they were profligate slave traders way back when it was cool.

[mech_401]

i humbly suggest , the protestors in inner cities,
their numbers, the real estate they occupy, is a
tiny fraction of the whole african-american pop.

untold legions are successful , having normal
jobs, businessess, being entrepreneurs etc., don't
hear from them though. fear of backlash too great

[Whistler]

i have no idea what you're blathering on about
and i seriously don't think you do either ? 1st you
say it's police brutality , now you vacillate and
say it's people feeling oppressed? were you to
ask the rioters/ looters , you'd probably get some
different answers there too. all over the board

You think police brutality and people feeling racially oppressed are mutually exclusive? They are very obviously parts of a broader problem. I note you left legitimate protesters of your list, so its only rioters and looters.

Showing your own biases here.

[anefarious1]

Look at the USD/BHT exchange rate sinking fast. Part of the US coming apart at the seams?

[tamada]

^ I was simply countering a weak argument that suggested that only having 1% of a living black population somehow precludes having any voice in this forum debate.

I would consider the slave trade as being the crux of the current contretemps, regardless of the height and haircut of those who enabled it all those years ago, but each to his own. I don't think that any of the Scottish enablers were significant slave owners per se but they did provide whole lot of boats, financial and other services that hugely benefited those that did. More than a handful were serving MP's, had towns named after them and a few got their peerages regardless of how un-cool the abolitionists successfully painted it.

I am not about erasing history either. There's absolutely no need to remove monuments and statues IMHO. One can't just airbrush this from a nation's history and psyche. Plaques can be replaced with reworded ones that detail the less salubrious acts of a city's or university's benefactor. History books should never omit, delete or cover up the more odious acts of former colonialists, industrialists and statesmen either.

[Whistler]

^ I was simply countering a weak argument that suggested that only having 1% of a living black population somehow precludes having any voice in this forum debate.

I would consider the slave trade as being the crux of the current contretemps, regardless of the height and haircut of those who enabled it all those years ago, but each to his own. I don't think that any of the Scottish enablers were significant slave owners per se but they did provide whole lot of boats, financial and other services that hugely benefited those that did. More than a handful were serving MP's, had towns named after them and a few got their peerages regardless of how un-cool the abolitionists successfully painted it.

I am not about erasing history either. There's absolutely no need to remove monuments and statues IMHO. One can't just airbrush this from a nation's history and psyche. Plaques can be replaced with reworded ones that detail the less salubrious acts of a city's or university's benefactor. History books should never omit, delete or cover up the more odious acts of former colonialists, industrialists and statesmen either.

The current debate is not a small argument (contretemps). I would suggest Scottish slave trading in the 18th century was principally part of the Caribbean based sugar industry rather than being principals in the US slave trading past, no need for me to go back to the flood on that period.

Slavery ended a long time ago, but America is unique in the Western World in the relationship between black people and the white majority. It's is not a huge problem in Canada, other nations abolished slavery decades ahead of America, the KKK and other extreme hate groups were not part of a widespread section of the populace who controlled police and governments, denying voting rights, brutalizing black people. It is almost uniquely American.

Many European nations and their colonies had slaves in past centuries, but they do not have the racial issues besetting America.

[mech_401]

oh whistler , your penchant for half-truths , ignoring entire chapters of history and trying to
fabricate others , will not serve you well here.

in the 18th century , over 3 million slaves were
shipped to u.k. colonies in the caribbean. scotland
had 600,000 slaves in residence. landowners & lords got filthy rich profiteering off slave trade.
it didn't end overnight but took decades to stop.
streets, mansions, estates still exist as evidence.

and , if we were to research who started bringing
slaves to u.s.a. i wonder what we would discover?
the exact same filthy traders were all complicit

[tamada]

...

Many European nations and their colonies had slaves in past centuries, but they do not have the racial issues besetting America.

For example, Dutch and Portuguese slaves were in their former colonies in Suriname and Brazil with very few enslaved in Holland or Portugal. In contrast, America's slaves were enslaved in the homeland, not some distant colony. Maybe that's the big difference? Slavery in the US ended a relatively long time ago but full emancipation was/is slower, possibly lasting longer than the period of actual US slavery itself?

[Whistler]

...

Many European nations and their colonies had slaves in past centuries, but they do not have the racial issues besetting America.

For example, Dutch and Portuguese slaves were in their former colonies in Suriname and Brazil with very few enslaved in Holland or Portugal. In contrast, America's slaves were enslaved in the homeland, not some distant colony. Maybe that's the big difference? Slavery in the US ended a relatively long time ago but full emancipation was/is slower, possibly lasting longer than the period of actual US slavery itself?

I think there is a lot of merit in that argument. While Canada had its share, it was. It the huge number that the is had. Add to this mix that the USA became a superpower, and the citizens of all superpowers, like Britain before them, think they are superior, it is a heady mixture

[tamada]

[Whistler]

Agree GT, schadenfreude is heaps of fun

[RLTrader]

another video most Americans should not watch

Ingraham: Democrats have cancel America

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQfvs18n3ZA

[Whistler]

55

[anefarious1]

The US has reached the ultimate stage of absurdity where some people are held responsible for things that happened before they were born, while other people are not held responsible for what they themselves are doing today.

[GT93]

General Milley has now apologized for his menacing presence at Lafayette Square that made American democracy look very wobbly.

[tamada]

^ "menacing"? Really?

[tamada]

"You're fired!"

[glalt]

The democrats are to blame for Trump being president. The last election they had a despicable candidate. People voted for anyone EXCEPT Hillary. This coming election they have nominated an old corrupt senile guy who has soo much baggage that even Trump looks good. Why was Joe nominated? That was because even the democrats shy away from the far left socialist candidates. The silent majority of voters are smart enough to see that socialism doesn't work and has never worked. All those massive giveaway programs are paid for by working people. All that free stuff is NOT free.

[jackspratt]

The democrats are to blame for Trump being president. The last election they had a despicable candidate. People voted for anyone EXCEPT Hillary.

EXCEPT 3 million more of them voted FOR Hillary, as despicable as she may have been

How bad does that make Trump?

[Whistler]

The democrats are to blame for Trump being president. The last election they had a despicable candidate. People voted for anyone EXCEPT Hillary. This coming election they have nominated an old corrupt senile guy who has soo much baggage that even Trump looks good. Why was Joe nominated? That was because even the democrats shy away from the far left socialist candidates. The silent majority of voters are smart enough to see that socialism doesn't work and has never worked. All those massive giveaway programs are paid for by working people. All that free stuff is NOT free.

A lot of people thought Trump was the lesser of two evils. They know better now.