5 ms·

What about a statement such as "whites are responsible for slavery". It's true, but not all "whites" were responsible. I think a lot of people wouldn't bat an e

What about a statement such as "whites are responsible for slavery". It's true, but not all "whites" were responsible. I think a lot of people wouldn't bat an eye at this comment. However, at an individual level it seems unfair to me, since obviously not everyone that was qualified by the label "white" during slavery is responsible.

krapp 8y ago
>However, at an individual level it seems unfair to me, since obviously not everyone that was qualified by the label "white" during slavery is responsible. All white people as individuals were not responsible for slavery, and some even opposed it, but all still benefited from slavery by virtue of being born into the race, society and class that the slave system was designed to benefit. That is unfair, but nonetheless true.
- MadSudaca 8y ago
  > but all still benefited from slavery by virtue of being born into the race, society and class that the slave system was designed to benefit. This is false. Many benefited, true, but not all. And even if it was true, I don't see why people should be made responsible for the actions of others that under some definition are from their same "group", even if they benefited from them. This is collectivism/racism at its finest, it bothers me tremendously and I'm not even white.
  - krapp 8y ago
    >This is false. Many benefited, true, but not all. There are indirect benefits and direct benefits to an unjust system - implicit as well as explicit power that comes from membership in a privileged class. Having legal rights and protections that other classes don't enjoy is a benefit. Being allowed to read, having autonomy over your own children, being able to walk freely, being allowed to maintain a connection to one's ancestors, religion and emigrant homeland... these are all benefits granted to white people as a group during slavery. > I don't see why people should be made responsible for the actions of others that under some definition are from their same "group", even if they benefited from them. Well... I did concede that they shouldn't, and weren't. But if one group of people are considered property, and another group of people are legally capable of owning the first, then the latter group benefits from that system if only because they aren't the former. It just happens that, at that time and place, the necessary selector for privilege was "whiteness." In another time, it might have been religion, or ethnicity or culture or following the wrong King. There were plenty of societies that practiced slavery that discriminated along many lines.
    - aaron-lebo 8y ago
      But these rights were not granted to entire groups of people during slavery. See how the Irish were treated both by the British and as immigrants to the US. They were seen as lesser. Irish Catholics and many other groups had no special place as immigrants, they didn't get positive points for not being African. That's the unfortunate truth with all forms of discrimination, it's hardly something limited by class, race or time.
      - vhudud 8y ago
        Irish american here. My ancestors came after slavery waa abolished in the us. They faced much discrimination when they arrived. Yet i still indirectly benefit from slavery and its repercussions. My family fled a decaying crime filled city to the suburbs. Their black neighbors could not, thanks to redlining and restrictive conevants. But by then, irish Americans were more likely to be seen as white. I grew up in a nice town with good schools as a result. Sure, slavery didnt literally benefit every white person. But youd be hard pressed to find a white person today who never experienced any form of white privellage
        throw55 8y ago
        "My family fled a decaying crime filled city to the suburbs." Your family fled the huge crime wave committed by blacks in the cities in the 60s-70s. If blacks had not been brought over to the US in the first place, your family would not have to flee. That's why it was called 'white flight' - it was whites fleeing rampant black crime.
      - tptacek 8y ago
        They got massive points for not being African. They were included --- belatedly --- in the definition of "white" precisely so they could join other European Americans in solidarity against Africans. "No positive points for Irish for not being black" is a crazy, ahistorical thing to say. When I was born, in the 1970s, there wasn't a neighborhood in Chicago my Irish family couldn't have gotten a mortgage in. African Americans couldn't say that!
vhudud 8y ago
Who is attacking white people here? Nobody is blaming all white people for slavery. At least not in this article or in the comments here. Maybe "whites are responsible for slavery" is a deceptive statement for all i know. But nobodys saying that.
- MadSudaca 8y ago
  To me this is basically what the original commenter is saying, for which he was heavily downvoted.

krapp 8y ago

>However, at an individual level it seems unfair to me, since obviously not everyone that was qualified by the label "white" during slavery is responsible. All white people as individuals were not responsible for slavery, and some even opposed it, but all still benefited from slavery by virtue of being born into the race, society and class that the slave system was designed to benefit. That is unfair, but nonetheless true.

MadSudaca 8y ago
> but all still benefited from slavery by virtue of being born into the race, society and class that the slave system was designed to benefit. This is false. Many benefited, true, but not all. And even if it was true, I don't see why people should be made responsible for the actions of others that under some definition are from their same "group", even if they benefited from them. This is collectivism/racism at its finest, it bothers me tremendously and I'm not even white.
- krapp 8y ago
  >This is false. Many benefited, true, but not all. There are indirect benefits and direct benefits to an unjust system - implicit as well as explicit power that comes from membership in a privileged class. Having legal rights and protections that other classes don't enjoy is a benefit. Being allowed to read, having autonomy over your own children, being able to walk freely, being allowed to maintain a connection to one's ancestors, religion and emigrant homeland... these are all benefits granted to white people as a group during slavery. > I don't see why people should be made responsible for the actions of others that under some definition are from their same "group", even if they benefited from them. Well... I did concede that they shouldn't, and weren't. But if one group of people are considered property, and another group of people are legally capable of owning the first, then the latter group benefits from that system if only because they aren't the former. It just happens that, at that time and place, the necessary selector for privilege was "whiteness." In another time, it might have been religion, or ethnicity or culture or following the wrong King. There were plenty of societies that practiced slavery that discriminated along many lines.
  - aaron-lebo 8y ago
    But these rights were not granted to entire groups of people during slavery. See how the Irish were treated both by the British and as immigrants to the US. They were seen as lesser. Irish Catholics and many other groups had no special place as immigrants, they didn't get positive points for not being African. That's the unfortunate truth with all forms of discrimination, it's hardly something limited by class, race or time.
    - vhudud 8y ago
      Irish american here. My ancestors came after slavery waa abolished in the us. They faced much discrimination when they arrived. Yet i still indirectly benefit from slavery and its repercussions. My family fled a decaying crime filled city to the suburbs. Their black neighbors could not, thanks to redlining and restrictive conevants. But by then, irish Americans were more likely to be seen as white. I grew up in a nice town with good schools as a result. Sure, slavery didnt literally benefit every white person. But youd be hard pressed to find a white person today who never experienced any form of white privellage
      - throw55 8y ago
        "My family fled a decaying crime filled city to the suburbs." Your family fled the huge crime wave committed by blacks in the cities in the 60s-70s. If blacks had not been brought over to the US in the first place, your family would not have to flee. That's why it was called 'white flight' - it was whites fleeing rampant black crime.
    - tptacek 8y ago
      They got massive points for not being African. They were included --- belatedly --- in the definition of "white" precisely so they could join other European Americans in solidarity against Africans. "No positive points for Irish for not being black" is a crazy, ahistorical thing to say. When I was born, in the 1970s, there wasn't a neighborhood in Chicago my Irish family couldn't have gotten a mortgage in. African Americans couldn't say that!

vhudud 8y ago

Who is attacking white people here? Nobody is blaming all white people for slavery. At least not in this article or in the comments here. Maybe "whites are responsible for slavery" is a deceptive statement for all i know. But nobodys saying that.

MadSudaca 8y ago
To me this is basically what the original commenter is saying, for which he was heavily downvoted.