Equal opportunity racism at UVa

[preciousjeni]

There were slaves throughout the country, not just in the south. When slaves were "freed" in the south, slavery still existed in the north. They weren't made to free their slaves.

[valkyrie]

Originally posted by hoosier
Our Vietnamese, Chinese, Cuban, and Korean friends have shown how hard work, sticking together, and positive goals - not victimization - leads to success.

Wow you guys, I must have been absent the day they taught about how white people went over to Vietnam, China, Cuba and Korea and forced people living there to get on boats and brought them to America and sold them so they could do work for people.

Why are so many people trying to say that the struggle of black Americans is equivalent to that of any other race? I don't think it is.

[moe.ron]

Originally posted by jubilance1922
Based on your name, I'll actually explain this one:

Majority and minority have NOTHING to do with numbers! It has to do with who holds the power in the society...

Would you like to try your answer again?

Ok, how do you explain the AWB?

[Senusret I]

Originally posted by hoosier
1 - Wrong. There were only slaves in the agricultural southern states. The northern states had a capitalist economy

2 - Wrong. I didn't hear it mentioned in the recent campaign. If you can cite any law in any jurisdiction keeping minorities down, please post such.

3 - Wrong. (Altho it may be true as long as the poverty and racism pimps like Jesse, Al, and the King clan find it financially advantageous to promote victimism.) If Bill Cosby's message could get out, who knows how much progress could be achieved quickly.

Our Vietnamese, Chinese, Cuban, and Korean friends have shown how hard work, sticking together, and positive goals - not victimization - leads to success.

No, I am not wrong. You happen to disagree. There is a difference.

[SigmaChiGuy]

Senusret I, you're wrong. When was the last time Hoosier wasn't wrong? Never. Now, shut the hell up and go make me some egg-rolls.

Originally posted by Senusret I
No, I am not wrong. You happen to disagree. There is a difference.

[jubilance1922]

Originally posted by moe.ron
Ok, how do you explain the AWB?

Perhaps if people used real words instead of acronyms, I could. But alas, AWB could stand for anything....

[moe.ron]

Originally posted by jubilance1922
Perhaps if people used real words instead of acronyms, I could. But alas, AWB could stand for anything....

Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging

The Afrikaner neither hold political power, they are the minority in term of the population, and economically, English speaking whites and the Indian dominates. So, they are a minority in every categories, yet they espouse racist ideology.

[Little E]

Originally posted by preciousjeni
There were slaves throughout the country, not just in the south. When slaves were "freed" in the south, slavery still existed in the north. They weren't made to free their slaves.

I'm really not trying to be rude. But I think I must have missed this day in history class. I thought that slaves had been emancipated before the war in the North. And that the civil war was the result of tensions in Congress over slavery yes or no? I mean, they pre-determined the legality of slavery in the western states as those states were being incorporated and they based those decisions on the north/south divide.

Again, I am actually curious if I misunderstood history.

[Lindz928]

Originally posted by preciousjeni
But you can move somewhere else and not experience these issues.

Sorry to jump into this thread, but I just have to say this. ANYONE can find somewhere to move where their race is in the majority, or at least not the MINORITY. Every city in this country is not just full of rich white people who want to look at you like you are about to attack them. In the place that I grew up, I was the one looked at like I didn't belong because of the color of my skin. But, I'm not complaining about it... I chose to change my surroundings, and anyone else can do that too.

I do think racism still exists (on EVERY side of it), and I do think it is wrong. But, I also think it is wrong for people to expect a handout or special treatment because of the color of their skin. I think hardwork will get anyone anything.

I am sorry if you have experienced people acting like you did not work hard and earn what you have gotten. I think that that too is wrong. But, don't look at all of us and assume that we will all think the same thing.

I say, take each person for who they are, don't assume anything.

Ok, I'm gonna go now. Thanks for listening.

[mrblonde]

<-- pouring gasoline all over this thread, striking a match...

[IvySpice]

Clarification of history:

1. In 1776, slavery was legal in all 13 of the original colonies. There weren't a ton of slaves in Massachusetts or New Hampshire, but there were some.

2. Many Northern states began outlawing slavery, primarily for economic reasons but to some degree because of abolitionist sentiment, long before the civil war.

3. By the time the Civil War began, slavery had been outlawed in all the Northern states, but was still very prominent in the Southern and border states.

4. preciousjeni may be referring to states like Kentucky that were slave states, but not in rebellion at the time of the Emancipation Proclamation; slaves in these states were not officially freed until passage of the 13th Amendment after the war ended. There were no slaves on the eastern seaboard north of Maryland at the time of the war, however (at least not legally).

So there is a history of slavery throughout the eastern half of this country, including in the north, but in some areas, like New England, that history is much shorter and ended longer ago than it did in the south. Parts of the Midwest and Northwest, in contrast, forbade slavery from the time of their initial settlement by "Americans."

[Rudey]

The economic reasons thing is wrong.

-Rudey

Originally posted by IvySpice
Clarification of history:

1. In 1776, slavery was legal in all 13 of the original colonies. There weren't a ton of slaves in Massachusetts or New Hampshire, but there were some.

2. Many Northern states began outlawing slavery, primarily for economic reasons but to some degree because of abolitionist sentiment, long before the civil war.

3. By the time the Civil War began, slavery had been outlawed in all the Northern states, but was still very prominent in the Southern and border states.

4. preciousjeni may be referring to states like Kentucky that were slave states, but not in rebellion at the time of the Emancipation Proclamation; slaves in these states were not officially freed until passage of the 13th Amendment after the war ended. There were no slaves on the eastern seaboard north of Maryland at the time of the war, however (at least not legally).

So there is a history of slavery throughout the eastern half of this country, including in the north, but in some areas, like New England, that history is much shorter and ended longer ago than it did in the south. Parts of the Midwest and Northwest, in contrast, forbade slavery from the time of their initial settlement by "Americans."