3 ms·
If it's ahistorical, you have the option to provide evidence to the contrary that disproves the facts stated above. Instead what I'm seeing is ad-hominem bigot
by BadassFractal 8y ago
If it's ahistorical, you have the option to provide evidence to the contrary that disproves the facts stated above.
Instead what I'm seeing is ad-hominem bigoteering that attempts to ascribe bad faith, nefarious motives to someone even bringing up historical facts that can be looked up by anybody with access to the web or a library.
- pvg 8y agoNo, I'm not ascribing bad faith, I don't know if you're a racist-apologist, or (as I tend to assume) just message-board-fashionably ignorant or something else. And you are right, access to the web or a library will show you that no serious historians of the African slave trade sit around comparing it to the Soviet Gulags or claim it does not stand out as a phenomenon against the many other examples of slavery throughout history. Nobody does that because it's obviously silly, even in the most punctiliously charitable interpretation.
- hyumin 8y agoThoroughly enjoying how this thread about female warriors in an ancient kingdom devolved into a historical revisionism thread about the european slave trade