Slavery: 200yrs on.

[c.j.jaxxon]

No. I don't think so. While all of the actors you named made top flight movies they now have the luxury of picking and choosing their roles but it wasn't always that way with them if you look at how they started, at least for some of them. Some of them started out ok but only a few of them win Oscars for their roles. There're actors and actresses who still can't get good roles. Movies like "Soul Plane", "Big Mamma's House" and the latest movie by Eddie Murphy playing a double role as a man being chased around by a big woman also played be Eddie are jokes. Intelligent black people didn't go to see stuff like that. We went to see "Blood Diamond", "Amastad", "Akeila and the Bee" etc. Of course "hood" movies have to have blacks in them but "Boys In The Hood", "Juice", and other like them are nothing but updated blaxploitation movies to us.

[Sam Slater]

Of course I knew what you meant, but what you meant doesn't stand up. I was questioning the logic of using the word 'we', not questioning what you meant.

For someone to apologise, there has to be a victim to apologise to.......oh and someone to have to done something wrong to refer their apology!

You can say 'we' when referring to black people in general, or Americans in general, or people from Chicago in general (if you live in Chicago that is), but what you can't do is refer yourself and black slaves from 200 years ago as 'we'. At least not in this sense because to accept an apology you have to be the victim unless you're passing on an apology. You cannot accept an apology and pass it on to someone who's dead. The apology itself would come from a person who is only apologising on behalf of someone who's dead, so the apology would be coming from a dead person onto another through two races that happen to be alive at the time and then passed on to another dead person. Since the person who's apologising is dead, how can we tell they wanted to apologise? Thus the apology may be insincere. How do we know the dead victims would accept the apology anyway?

Confused? The above paragraph sounds like a load of bollocks doesn't it? That's because it is bollocks! All of it.

[c.j.jaxxon]

So be it. We'll be debating 'til infinity. !rant! !rant! !drink! !drink!

[Sam Slater]

Yeah you're right in a way. They probably did get shitty roles before they got big.......but so did a lot of white actors too I guess.

Most people start at the bottom and work their way up C.J. Unless your parents were billionaires or something. Still....most of the best actors I admire are black these days (I like Denzel Washington and Morgan Freeman's acting).

Don't know what you mean about 'Big Momas House' & 'Soul Plane' though.

On those grounds I'd say Waynes World, Bill & Teds bogus journey, Forest Gump, White Men Can't Jump (could name hundreds of movies) where whites are portrayed as dumb and idiotic, should be classed as demeaning to white people then?.....or young people.

I don't see any discrimination or hidden agendas to make black people look stupid, or take on shitty roles. I just see a few movies you don't like, and reading too much into things.

My advice would be to enjoy the movies! !laugh!

[one eyed jack]

If I was to be cynical, realistic even about it I would say slavery was really abolished mainly because slave labour was also responsible for a lot of high unemployment more than people thinking it was immoral.

I really doubt the people that gave up their slaves begrudgingly saw them any less than the animals they thought they were. You only have to look at how blacks were treated with sitting on the back of buses and no niggers allowed here signs to know this.

I dont doubt there were some good and just people who saw it as morally wrong at the time but my money is on the reason I just stated.

Not that I have a chip on my shoulder mind. Just being realistic to the ways of human beings maintaining their status quo.

Those who love saying "Go back to Africa!" would do well to remember that their predecessors were responsible for bringing them here in the first place.

The difference between then and now is back then blacks didnt have a choice.

While we're on the subject I dont think white folks should be singled out either. It was an international business of jews, portugese, europeans and black people too. Oh yes. Black people have a lot to answer for selling out their own people for afew mere shillings too. If anyone should come out and apologise I dont see these other people coming to the fore.

Mans inhumanity to man is not a black and white issue after all.

[c.j.jaxxon]

I just thought about this. A black radio host here and 67 other people all went on a group travel to Ghana and from what the host is saying (mind you he and others have been to Africa more than once) that the Ashante Africans are apologizing for the selling of their fellow Africans I assume whenever they do the tour guiding thing or whenever they have meeting etc. In fact the Africans WANT blacks from around the diaspora mainly the U.S. to invest in Africa. Time and time again I here that the Africans LOVE when other blacks come back home and I also hear something about working out a dual citizenship for other blacks if they want it. Also from want I understand that when black did enslave other blacks it wasn't brutal like the whites in the U.S. did and the Africans had certain rules and regulations on slavery they had to follow for instance you could only hold a slave for a certain amount of years. The Africans sold their bretheren not thinking that the white would treat the slaves the same way. Whenever whites enslaved anybody it was always more brutal and blacks were more prized as slaves because the Native Americans couldn't take it as well as their own white bretheren.

[strictlybroadband]

I'm really bored of this Iran "hostage" business. It's only 15 people FFS... slavery affected 30 million.

[middle_aged_dutchman]

????

But the hostage problem has to be solved now. The slavery problem has been solved 200 years ago.

[Sam Slater]

[quote]I just thought about this. A black radio host here and 67 other people all went on a group travel to Ghana and from what the host is saying (mind you he and others have been to Africa more than once) that the Ashanti Africans are apologizing for the selling of their fellow Africans I assume whenever they do the tour guiding thing or whenever they have meeting etc.[/quote]

Good for them. They didn't need to apologise to anybody though as they've done fuck all wrong to any Americans. Hey, since the apologies are during tour guides I wonder if money has anything to do with them being overly nice? Ah, I'm so cynical........

[quote]Also from want I understand that when black did enslave other blacks it wasn't brutal like the whites in the U.S. did and the Africans had certain rules and regulations on slavery they had to follow for instance you could only hold a slave for a certain amount of years. The Africans sold their bretheren not thinking that the white would treat the slaves the same way. Whenever whites enslaved anybody it was always more brutal[/quote]

Wow C.J. you really want to be angry at somebody. You're angry at white Europeans for the slave trade and when someone informs you that Black tribes enslaved eachother also, and that a lot of Euro slave trading was done by certain black tribes, you cannot accept it because it's easier to point the finger at someone else. You google around desperately trying to find excuses for black-on-black slavery only to find an excuse that 'oh we weren't as brutal, and we only borrowed the slaves a little while'.

Only the white men were brutal! !laugh!

Imagine saying, 'only black men beat their wives'. C.J. !shocked!

You only have to look at Africa now to see brutality C.J. A favourite is impaling by shoving a pole up the anus and leaving the guys bodyweight to do all the work. The stake slowly rips open the colon and cuts through the intestines, up through the liver and into the lungs or heart. Then there's the raping of children and cutting off heads..........you know, the usual stuff.

Of course, there'll be an explanation somewhere that blames white people for the current brutality, because it sits easier with the conscience.

Realise that the slave trade as we know it was indeed predominantly done by Europeans. 'Slavery' was -and is still to an extent- done by 'humanity'. Humans are to blame, not just the white man, and that goes for brutality too. Unfortunately, only the white enslavers kept written documentations and photographs of their slave trade, and thus it's the only one spoken about. All races are just -if not more- guilty.

If it makes you sleep easier to blame everything on 'the white man' then who am I to stop a guy getting a good nights sleep?

[strictlybroadband]

middle_aged_dutchman wrote:

> ????
>
> But the hostage problem has to be solved now. The slavery
> problem has been solved 200 years ago.

No it wasn't. The trade was abolished 200 years ago. The US abolished slavery 157 years ago. But the problems it caused still exist and were never addressed.