6 ms·

Personally I would like to see a broader and less American perspective on slavery. While chattel slavery in the American antebellum South went away, slavery in

by nilkn 7y ago

Personally I would like to see a broader and less American perspective on slavery. While chattel slavery in the American antebellum South went away, slavery in general certainly didn't, and it also didn't begin in 1619. To illustrate that latter point, in 1619 slavery was a general practice in Africa, and many of the first slaves imported by Europeans were already enslaved in Africa as a byproduct of endemic warfare. Even today many industries' profitability depends on slavery in the undeveloped world -- it's just no longer visible to Americans. Certainly this isn't meant to diminish this piece. American slavery became particularly incendiary because it developed a racial component that long outlasted its abolition and continues to have ripple effects today not just in America but elsewhere due to the wide export of American culture. But I also don't want to be so quick as to equate slavery in general with one particular (and, indeed, relatively small-scale) instance that did end when we have other larger instances still active today -- instances that we even depend on and make use of.

aflag 7y ago
Learning from local history is, if nothing else, a good introduction to the subject.
conroy 7y ago
"The 1619 Project is a major initiative from The New York Times observing the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. " If you're looking for a broader view on slavery, a project dedicated to American slavery isn't going to offer you that perspective.
- nilkn 7y ago
  That's my point. I think we're reaching a point in history where we can start looking at slavery at its true scope and scale, both in geography and time, so I'm increasingly less enthused with analysis that doesn't attempt to look beyond the US's involvement during the antebellum period. The US is still involved -- just with a different form of slavery in a different part of the world. It's still driven to this day by largely the same economic incentives discussed here.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - lostphilosopher 7y ago
    > "I think we're reaching a point in history where we can start looking at slavery at its true scope and scale" But are we though? I still encounter a non trivial number of people in the real world with objectively wrong ideas about the history of slavery in the US. We all see some of those folks passing laws and talking on national television. I am generally not convinced that Americans really understand how recent slavery was, how present its impacts are today, how directly it explains both historically and literally at the time large aspects of our legal system, society, and general inequality issues today. I agree with you that there's way more focus on the "US antebellum period" than other aspects, and that we should spend more time on the the other aspects than we do. Especially the modern day instances we actively propagate. But that seems like it should be an "and" effort not an effort at the expense of figuring out our own history. Also - to anyone taking nilkn in bad faith - reconsider. We need to be able to share opinions and ask questions we know aren't super popular or that skirt hot button topics. Doing so is how we learn. As long as we do it carefully, respectfully, and with an open mind. Worst case scenario is for ideas to stay unexamined in our heads or uncritically reinforced in an echo chamber.
    - pathseeker 7y ago
      >But are we though? I still encounter a non trivial number of people in the real world with objectively wrong ideas about the history of slavery in the US. We all see some of those folks passing laws and talking on national television. None of these people at this point are going to be reading the NYTimes for its pieces on slavery. So yes, the base that reads the NYTimes should start looking at a wider scope, especially if its slavery still active today.
martey 7y ago
You stated that you don't want to "diminish this piece", but then go on to describe American slavery (this project's sole focus) as "one particular (and, indeed, relatively small-scale) instance". Your comment also contains multiple points (e.g. "slavery wasn't invented in America", "American slaves were enslaved in Africa", "slavery still exists in non-American places today") that are regularly used by people trying to diminish or erase the impact of slavery and racism on American culture today. Because the project is investigating the legacy of American slavery, I think discussing current global slavery is at best off-topic.
- nilkn 7y ago
  I acknowledge whole-heartedly that this is a difficult topic, but I really don't think it's that off-topic. The articles available so far focus a lot on the economic incentives involved in slavery and how the American economy was boosted because of it. The observation that those same incentives are still sustaining slavery and that the economy is still boosted by it seems relevant to me.
  - martey 7y ago
    > The articles available so far focus a lot on the economic incentives involved in slavery and how the American economy was boosted because of it. This is incorrect - only two articles out of twelve (about American capitalism and the sugar industry) focus on "how the American economy was boosted because of [slavery]". The rest talk about medicine, music, housing segregation, and democracy. Modern day slavery might be primarily an economic issue, but I think it's wrong to only consider American slavery in this context because doing so ignores its "racial component" and its current day ramifications.
  - mcguire 7y ago
    You are dancing perilously close to what-aboutism, though. The context of American slavery within global and historical slavery is an important topic, but within this context, it sounds like an attempt to minimize the effect and power of American slavery.
cagenut 7y ago
what ever happened to the HN rule against middlebrow contrarian responses? maybe at least not having them almost always be the top reply?
- nilkn 7y ago
  I think my comment is only at the top (for now, at least) because nothing in this thread is particularly upvoted. I certainly didn't mean to offend and I won't take issue if a moderator decides to remove my comment or "demote" it (for lack of a better word). I will say I don't think calling something "middlebrow" is actually a meaningful critique, and there's really nothing I can say in response to that.
  - klenwell 7y ago
    I generally try to avoid downvotes but I downvoted your top-level comment because I thought it was a derail on an important topic that needs more awareness and informed conversation. (To put it in terms some devs might better relate to: I think The 1619 Project is well scoped and your suggestion if followed would introduce unnecessary scope creep.) I did think a couple of your follow-up comments were thoughtful and appropriate so I did upvote those.
rdtsc 7y ago
Moreover America's hand in promoting and contributing to slavery doesn't need traveling back hundreds of years Just look back 2 years ago: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/10/libya-public-slave-auctions-un-migration https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/10/libya-public-s... Open air slave markets. People sold as animals or produce. What happened there? Well, apparently "We come, we saw, he died!" <followed by laughing>. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y . That's what happened. I would argue, after "exporting our democracy" there, the labor and blood of those slaves are on our hands as well.
NoodleIncident 7y ago
I feel like you're misinterpreting this project completely. There is an intersection between "slavery" and "america". On a venn diagram, this project is intended to illustrate just how large that intersecting segment is compared to the "america" circle. The relative size of the "slavery" circle is what you're referring to in this comment, but it's an almost unrelated subject.
- trhway 7y ago
  >it's an almost unrelated subject. it is like insisting on discussing climate in one given country without referencing global climate context. How slavery in America is embedded in the global slavery history is important because it makes it almost [relatively speaking of course] non-event having slavery in 16xx when everybody was having it (after all it was the dark times when witches were still being burned for example), while it underscores and highlights the fact that it took Civil War that late in the game to enforce the abolishment (comparison to Britain is especially informative considering that slavery in America started as slavery in British colonies) and the racism has been still reverberating into our days - through Jim Crow to War On Drugs and Povetry and prison inmates slave labor (btw, curious development after those ICE raids on the chicken plants - inmates seems to be replacing the arrested and scared away immigrants. Again make sense to compare to other developed countries on the issues of racism and the treatment of inmates and illegal immigration ).
mixmastamyk 7y ago
Interestingly, Brazil had a much greater number of slaves, in absolute terms and per-capita, but is often forgotten for some reason. Including in your call for a broader perspective.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

by nilkn 7y ago

aflag 7y ago

Learning from local history is, if nothing else, a good introduction to the subject.

conroy 7y ago

"The 1619 Project is a major initiative from The New York Times observing the 400th anniversary of the beginning of American slavery. " If you're looking for a broader view on slavery, a project dedicated to American slavery isn't going to offer you that perspective.

nilkn 7y ago
That's my point. I think we're reaching a point in history where we can start looking at slavery at its true scope and scale, both in geography and time, so I'm increasingly less enthused with analysis that doesn't attempt to look beyond the US's involvement during the antebellum period. The US is still involved -- just with a different form of slavery in a different part of the world. It's still driven to this day by largely the same economic incentives discussed here.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- lostphilosopher 7y ago
  > "I think we're reaching a point in history where we can start looking at slavery at its true scope and scale" But are we though? I still encounter a non trivial number of people in the real world with objectively wrong ideas about the history of slavery in the US. We all see some of those folks passing laws and talking on national television. I am generally not convinced that Americans really understand how recent slavery was, how present its impacts are today, how directly it explains both historically and literally at the time large aspects of our legal system, society, and general inequality issues today. I agree with you that there's way more focus on the "US antebellum period" than other aspects, and that we should spend more time on the the other aspects than we do. Especially the modern day instances we actively propagate. But that seems like it should be an "and" effort not an effort at the expense of figuring out our own history. Also - to anyone taking nilkn in bad faith - reconsider. We need to be able to share opinions and ask questions we know aren't super popular or that skirt hot button topics. Doing so is how we learn. As long as we do it carefully, respectfully, and with an open mind. Worst case scenario is for ideas to stay unexamined in our heads or uncritically reinforced in an echo chamber.
  - pathseeker 7y ago
    >But are we though? I still encounter a non trivial number of people in the real world with objectively wrong ideas about the history of slavery in the US. We all see some of those folks passing laws and talking on national television. None of these people at this point are going to be reading the NYTimes for its pieces on slavery. So yes, the base that reads the NYTimes should start looking at a wider scope, especially if its slavery still active today.

martey 7y ago

You stated that you don't want to "diminish this piece", but then go on to describe American slavery (this project's sole focus) as "one particular (and, indeed, relatively small-scale) instance". Your comment also contains multiple points (e.g. "slavery wasn't invented in America", "American slaves were enslaved in Africa", "slavery still exists in non-American places today") that are regularly used by people trying to diminish or erase the impact of slavery and racism on American culture today. Because the project is investigating the legacy of American slavery, I think discussing current global slavery is at best off-topic.

nilkn 7y ago
I acknowledge whole-heartedly that this is a difficult topic, but I really don't think it's that off-topic. The articles available so far focus a lot on the economic incentives involved in slavery and how the American economy was boosted because of it. The observation that those same incentives are still sustaining slavery and that the economy is still boosted by it seems relevant to me.
- martey 7y ago
  > The articles available so far focus a lot on the economic incentives involved in slavery and how the American economy was boosted because of it. This is incorrect - only two articles out of twelve (about American capitalism and the sugar industry) focus on "how the American economy was boosted because of [slavery]". The rest talk about medicine, music, housing segregation, and democracy. Modern day slavery might be primarily an economic issue, but I think it's wrong to only consider American slavery in this context because doing so ignores its "racial component" and its current day ramifications.
- mcguire 7y ago
  You are dancing perilously close to what-aboutism, though. The context of American slavery within global and historical slavery is an important topic, but within this context, it sounds like an attempt to minimize the effect and power of American slavery.

cagenut 7y ago

what ever happened to the HN rule against middlebrow contrarian responses? maybe at least not having them almost always be the top reply?

nilkn 7y ago
I think my comment is only at the top (for now, at least) because nothing in this thread is particularly upvoted. I certainly didn't mean to offend and I won't take issue if a moderator decides to remove my comment or "demote" it (for lack of a better word). I will say I don't think calling something "middlebrow" is actually a meaningful critique, and there's really nothing I can say in response to that.
- klenwell 7y ago
  I generally try to avoid downvotes but I downvoted your top-level comment because I thought it was a derail on an important topic that needs more awareness and informed conversation. (To put it in terms some devs might better relate to: I think The 1619 Project is well scoped and your suggestion if followed would introduce unnecessary scope creep.) I did think a couple of your follow-up comments were thoughtful and appropriate so I did upvote those.

rdtsc 7y ago

Moreover America's hand in promoting and contributing to slavery doesn't need traveling back hundreds of years Just look back 2 years ago: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/10/libya-public-slave-auctions-un-migration https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/10/libya-public-s... Open air slave markets. People sold as animals or produce. What happened there? Well, apparently "We come, we saw, he died!" <followed by laughing>. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y . That's what happened. I would argue, after "exporting our democracy" there, the labor and blood of those slaves are on our hands as well.

NoodleIncident 7y ago

I feel like you're misinterpreting this project completely. There is an intersection between "slavery" and "america". On a venn diagram, this project is intended to illustrate just how large that intersecting segment is compared to the "america" circle. The relative size of the "slavery" circle is what you're referring to in this comment, but it's an almost unrelated subject.

trhway 7y ago
>it's an almost unrelated subject. it is like insisting on discussing climate in one given country without referencing global climate context. How slavery in America is embedded in the global slavery history is important because it makes it almost [relatively speaking of course] non-event having slavery in 16xx when everybody was having it (after all it was the dark times when witches were still being burned for example), while it underscores and highlights the fact that it took Civil War that late in the game to enforce the abolishment (comparison to Britain is especially informative considering that slavery in America started as slavery in British colonies) and the racism has been still reverberating into our days - through Jim Crow to War On Drugs and Povetry and prison inmates slave labor (btw, curious development after those ICE raids on the chicken plants - inmates seems to be replacing the arrested and scared away immigrants. Again make sense to compare to other developed countries on the issues of racism and the treatment of inmates and illegal immigration ).

mixmastamyk 7y ago

Interestingly, Brazil had a much greater number of slaves, in absolute terms and per-capita, but is often forgotten for some reason. Including in your call for a broader perspective.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]