egafd.com

Slavery? --- because without it most of the famous blacks would never have been born in the US - and would never have had the chance to succeed in anything but hunting leopards. The world would have been a totally different place,

[quote]Slavery? --- because without it most of the famous blacks would never have been born in the US[/quote]

No black president of the USA has ever had roots in slavery.

[quote]and would never have had the chance to succeed in anything but hunting leopards.[/quote]

Dear oh dear, hungwell. Dear oh dear oh dear. Your ignorance is worrying but hilarious. 'Leopards' eh? I'm not too sure on the exact numbers but I'd imagine there are a hundred antelope/gazelle/impala, as well as other more common, easier to catch, less dangerous animals to hunt, for every leopard in Africa. Not to mention domesticated livestock! !laugh!

Leopards, he says! !laugh!























Leopards! !laugh!

Sam Slater wrote:

> Nope....it's still not clear to me how slavery got a black man
> into the White House. Not when that black man had no roots in
> slavery.

If the 'suffragette' movement had never existed, we would not have had a woman Prime Minister in 1979, but we do not infer from this that Mrs Thatcher must have had roots in that movement.

I don't see the analogy.

The suffragette movement's aim was -in essence- equality and rights for -at least- women in the west. Mrs Thatcher gained from their fight.

Slavery's aim was to exploit certain peoples to maximise profit, not benefit black people in general.

For your point to make sense, you'd have to persuade me that no black man would have ever become President of the United States without slavery. My belief is that you can't, though I'm willing to listen to reason! You see, if slavery hadn't happened then it's still possible that Obama's father could have gone to Hawaii as a student and had a child with a white, American woman (or any other black man/woman for that matter). America never made slaves of latino people but that doesn't mean the likelihood of a latino-descended person cannot become president. Britain never enslaved Jews but we've already had a Jewish Prime Minster.

In contrast, without female equality then no woman would have become our leader. This is the biggest flaw in your analogy.

I'm trying to learn, Steve, and I eagerly await your response. I believe you're right and that maybe you've just missed something out that holds the key to unlocking it all for me. I'm mostly ignorant about the subject and just stating the little bits of what I know, and all of it seems to contradict what you're trying to tell me. How frustrating!

I'm afraid you're going to have to retake this year.

When you say "our part in his success" do you mean as people coloured white? or do you mean as in British?

If you meant the former then I would say white being american voters contingent had their part in it by voting for the man because they beleived he was the right man for the job.

Not because of his colour.

Like Sam I dont want to get ahead of myself and await to be educated by your answer.

Does it bother you that there is a black man in the White House Steve?

Sorry I did get ahdead of myself and didnt read your "correct" response to slavery....

Sheesh! What can i say? Why should I bother? Ive got far to many things to do right now.

The only gift I can think of was English as a language (Kenya had been a British colony - I would have thought that had a part in Obama's father's life). It's the same inadvertant gift that the British empire introduced to India.

And I second Andyatwork's sentiment. Personally, I hope Obama's inaugeration and administration make a start for overcoming what ingrained prejudice still remains; but I wouldn't recommend that anybody holds their breath.

Its not all bad news. I see from an article in today's Indy that apart from the more rabid Fox News elements, and the right-wing blogosphere, his ethnicity is barely mentioned now. He's simply the Prez.