4 ms·

> PS: I am curious why asking about continuing slavery in other parts of the world importing Black slaves is so heavily downvoted. Because it sounds very much

by lkbm 8y ago

> PS: I am curious why asking about continuing slavery in other parts of the world importing Black slaves is so heavily downvoted. Because it sounds very much like whataboutism. In an article about the US and slavery, you're talking about how other cultures may have been worse--ones completely unrelated to the current discussion.

EGreg 8y ago
I understand it sounds like whataboutism, but whatboutism is one of the most dangerous labels. It allows people to just dismiss conversation about current and pressing issues in the world in favor of navel gazing at a far less pressing issue. It provides cover for human rights abuses in countries which were conveniently “not the subject” of conversation initially. Like when women in the world are trafficked into sex slavery, married off as children, honor killings, caste rapes etc. and a charge of “whataboutism” is used to refocus on how a default avatar in social networks is unfairly male instead of female. It has been over a century since slavery was abolished in the USA yet it persisted and persists around the world now. I think it SHOULD be talked about, and analyzed and solved, whether or not it is whataboutism, just like we should talk about malaria or anything else. Just because it isn’t happening here doesn’t mean it’s not a BIGGER and more pressing problem. So just cause someone coined a stupid word doesn’t mean you get to dismiss issues affecting millions of people or excuse a double standard. Go beyond virtue signaling and care about actual utilitarian statistics and solutions. I would argue the supremacists are those who focus exclusively on their own ethnic group and navel gaze at their own coutry at the expense of people worldwide.
- hnbroseph 8y ago
  > virtue signaling the use of this meme seems seems rather correlated with a particular group of people.
  - EGreg 8y ago
    So is the whataboutism meme
    - hnbroseph 8y ago
      not really, no. it's mostly people not being a fan of diversionary tactics and misdirection, and from what i've seen that's fairly widespread.
- eropple 8y ago
  Then do as 'sctb said and post a substantiative, thought-provoking article about it. I'd be happy to discuss the issue there, because it is an important one. Bad shit does happen today, and needs to be discussed. But the fallout of the bad shit from the past matters too and trying to diminish that here suggests that your motives are not as pure as your representation of them suggests. Which may not be your intention...buuuut...I'd bet that way, Monsieur "Virtue Signal", Señor "They're The Real Supremacists", Mister "Let's Talk About Anybody But Me". Willing to be wrong, though. Put up.
  - EGreg 8y ago
    I would say the motives of those who talk about historical wrong X in the past while obstructing discssion of X happening today are also not pure. Everyone should evaluate themselves. That’s why I am not backing down and just agreeing. I find “calling whataboutism” to be disingenuous cover for double standards (speaking in general, not about anyone in particular). I am happy to talk about things if the intention is genuine. The people who care about historical wrong X seem to put up pedantic walls as soon as they are asked to care about X much closer and much more pressing to us. “Make another topic on HN and get it upvoted and maybe I will talk about slavery of Black people that has been happening in regions where it’s not as cool to critique at the moment.” Doesn’t seem to fit on a site where comments to “I invented a decentralized permissionless movie streaming platform” is “your site is green bleh” or some other thing. But talking about Black people being enslaved today is “diverting attention” from an article about Black people being enslaved by the country of which I am a citizen. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/series/modern-day-slavery-in-focus+world/middleeast https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/series/modern... It is a form of soft bigotry to me, if analyzed without the filter. A light form of collective insanity. And it doesn’t have to do with slavery in particular but pick any X issue.
- jonhendry18 8y ago
  "I would argue the supremacists are those who focus exclusively on their own ethnic group and navel gaze at their own coutry at the expense of people worldwide." And sometimes they're just responding to a topical article like a link to Frederick Douglass' speech on the 4th of July
  - EGreg 8y ago
    So was I. Fredrick Douglass spoke about the experience of the Negro being enslaved in USA. That was a powerful image. Normally, it would be quite appropriate to point out that people from the same continent, with the same skin, were enslaved also in Arab countries all through the 20th century and discuss the institution of slavery there and how it compared throughout history with the US institution. (Mamluks for example.) It can unearth a lot of interesting and historically useful information. But more to the point, Black people are being enslaved even today, but you would prefer to suppress this fact because why? Because freedom and independence wasn’t for everyone in Douglass time, IN THE USA. And what, only the USA matters? I am just trying to get you to see that if this was any other topic on HN, like eg a speech by Linus Torvalds about Git, a wide array of comments would be perfectly fine eg someone asking whether distributed VCS has really taken off, or (like I did) whether people still use centralized version control in some companies. Here we are talking about the lives of human beings. But apparently Black lives matter ONLY in the USA, women’s lives matter only in the USA, because mentioning current honor killings of women in some countries is racist. That is a perverse reaction and no, saying it’s “off topic” just makes it worse. You either don’t actually care about women's rights or ending slavery, or there is some overriding principle I am still not aware of that makes the same exact issue outside the USA so off topic as to be essentially unwelcome as a comment!

by lkbm 8y ago

EGreg 8y ago

I understand it sounds like whataboutism, but whatboutism is one of the most dangerous labels. It allows people to just dismiss conversation about current and pressing issues in the world in favor of navel gazing at a far less pressing issue. It provides cover for human rights abuses in countries which were conveniently “not the subject” of conversation initially. Like when women in the world are trafficked into sex slavery, married off as children, honor killings, caste rapes etc. and a charge of “whataboutism” is used to refocus on how a default avatar in social networks is unfairly male instead of female. It has been over a century since slavery was abolished in the USA yet it persisted and persists around the world now. I think it SHOULD be talked about, and analyzed and solved, whether or not it is whataboutism, just like we should talk about malaria or anything else. Just because it isn’t happening here doesn’t mean it’s not a BIGGER and more pressing problem. So just cause someone coined a stupid word doesn’t mean you get to dismiss issues affecting millions of people or excuse a double standard. Go beyond virtue signaling and care about actual utilitarian statistics and solutions. I would argue the supremacists are those who focus exclusively on their own ethnic group and navel gaze at their own coutry at the expense of people worldwide.

hnbroseph 8y ago
> virtue signaling the use of this meme seems seems rather correlated with a particular group of people.
- EGreg 8y ago
  So is the whataboutism meme
  - hnbroseph 8y ago
    not really, no. it's mostly people not being a fan of diversionary tactics and misdirection, and from what i've seen that's fairly widespread.
eropple 8y ago
Then do as 'sctb said and post a substantiative, thought-provoking article about it. I'd be happy to discuss the issue there, because it is an important one. Bad shit does happen today, and needs to be discussed. But the fallout of the bad shit from the past matters too and trying to diminish that here suggests that your motives are not as pure as your representation of them suggests. Which may not be your intention...buuuut...I'd bet that way, Monsieur "Virtue Signal", Señor "They're The Real Supremacists", Mister "Let's Talk About Anybody But Me". Willing to be wrong, though. Put up.
- EGreg 8y ago
  I would say the motives of those who talk about historical wrong X in the past while obstructing discssion of X happening today are also not pure. Everyone should evaluate themselves. That’s why I am not backing down and just agreeing. I find “calling whataboutism” to be disingenuous cover for double standards (speaking in general, not about anyone in particular). I am happy to talk about things if the intention is genuine. The people who care about historical wrong X seem to put up pedantic walls as soon as they are asked to care about X much closer and much more pressing to us. “Make another topic on HN and get it upvoted and maybe I will talk about slavery of Black people that has been happening in regions where it’s not as cool to critique at the moment.” Doesn’t seem to fit on a site where comments to “I invented a decentralized permissionless movie streaming platform” is “your site is green bleh” or some other thing. But talking about Black people being enslaved today is “diverting attention” from an article about Black people being enslaved by the country of which I am a citizen. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/series/modern-day-slavery-in-focus+world/middleeast https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/series/modern... It is a form of soft bigotry to me, if analyzed without the filter. A light form of collective insanity. And it doesn’t have to do with slavery in particular but pick any X issue.
jonhendry18 8y ago
"I would argue the supremacists are those who focus exclusively on their own ethnic group and navel gaze at their own coutry at the expense of people worldwide." And sometimes they're just responding to a topical article like a link to Frederick Douglass' speech on the 4th of July
- EGreg 8y ago
  So was I. Fredrick Douglass spoke about the experience of the Negro being enslaved in USA. That was a powerful image. Normally, it would be quite appropriate to point out that people from the same continent, with the same skin, were enslaved also in Arab countries all through the 20th century and discuss the institution of slavery there and how it compared throughout history with the US institution. (Mamluks for example.) It can unearth a lot of interesting and historically useful information. But more to the point, Black people are being enslaved even today, but you would prefer to suppress this fact because why? Because freedom and independence wasn’t for everyone in Douglass time, IN THE USA. And what, only the USA matters? I am just trying to get you to see that if this was any other topic on HN, like eg a speech by Linus Torvalds about Git, a wide array of comments would be perfectly fine eg someone asking whether distributed VCS has really taken off, or (like I did) whether people still use centralized version control in some companies. Here we are talking about the lives of human beings. But apparently Black lives matter ONLY in the USA, women’s lives matter only in the USA, because mentioning current honor killings of women in some countries is racist. That is a perverse reaction and no, saying it’s “off topic” just makes it worse. You either don’t actually care about women's rights or ending slavery, or there is some overriding principle I am still not aware of that makes the same exact issue outside the USA so off topic as to be essentially unwelcome as a comment!