3 ms·

If you're going to say that Western society was built with white males as the presumed default, you might want to also mention who the builders were. And as a

If you're going to say that Western society was built with white males as the presumed default, you might want to also mention who the builders were. And as a broader point, it also might be worth considering how Western society stacks up against all other societies to ever exist.

istjohn 7y ago
Slave labor built this country.
- hyperdunc 7y ago
  I don't see how such sweeping statements about the nature of a country are useful. Slave labor was only one component of practically all great countries/empires. The West was the first to outlaw it. The US in particular was built upon the hard-earned lessons of the past, including the moral worth of individual liberty.
  - c0nducktr 7y ago
    How is the US in particular built upon the hard-earned lessons of the past. Because it is younger? This just sounds like more American exceptionalism that most of the world is tired of, and that includes many Americans.
    - hyperdunc 7y ago
      The counterpoint to your second sentence is that most of the world would sacrifice much to migrate to the US.
      - c0nducktr 7y ago
        Fine: USA, #1 when compared to developing nations. Got an answer to my first sentence?
        hyperdunc 7y ago
        One example - the US Constitution draws from Ancient Greece and Rome, and is a response to the oppression of European monarchies. Louis XIV: "I am the state." US Constitution: "We the people...secure the Blessings of Liberty" That's no cosmetic difference.
        ascorbic 7y ago
        Sure, that was a big deal in 1776. But there's nothing exceptional about being a liberal democracy today, and there are plenty of countries that are more free than the US.
      - ascorbic 7y ago
        Most of the world is poor, and would like the chance to earn more money. That's nothing special about the US there. The same applies to most rich countries.
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  No it didn't. When it was legal, most inhabitants of the U.S. had no personal experience with slavery. It was critical to agriculture in the Southern states, but the North was the industrial powerhouse. And the states that constituted the North continue to be the most dominant region in the U.S. to this day.
- rjf72 7y ago
  There's an extremely interesting datum that most are not familiar with. In total in the transatlantic slave trade, about 12.5 million Africans were shipped to the New World. Of these, 10.7 million survived the voyage. And of those, about 388,000 thousand went to North America. [1] Up to 60-70k more would make their way North America eventually for a total of up to ~450k - about 4% of the slaves that made their way to the New World. North America's use of slavery was relatively low compared to many other places in the world. Even within the United States itself it's interesting to compare the states where slaves disproportionately ended up to those where they did not. And the Confederate/Union states works as a pretty solid proxy there. - Confederate: South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas - Union: California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and many others. Suffice to say, slavery does not seem have had a lasting positive effect for the states that most actively utilized it. Ultimately I think the reason slavery is more of a focus for the United States than other countries is not because of any unusual usage of slavery, but because of an extremely unusual outcome. For instance Brazil alone ended up taking on about 5 million slaves yet, like much of the south, has little to show for it. The point of this is not to say 'what about other countries' but to emphasize that the relative impact of slavery in the US was smaller than in many other places, yet we achieved vastly more than those places. So to attribute the exceptionalism of the United States to slavery, in any meaningful way, seems driven more by bias than logic. https://www.theroot.com/how-many-slaves-landed-in-the-us-1790873989 https://www.theroot.com/how-many-slaves-landed-in-the-us-179...
FussyZeus 7y ago
Except that Western civilization as in the minds of it's inhabitants likely wouldn't have existed without the subjugation and exploitation of those other societies, including but not limited to: China, India, the Middle East, most of Africa minus Ethiopia, and even some parts of Europe, and much more recently, South America. The West has largely won because it won a lot back in the day, and that inertia builds up and continues to favor us.
- hyperdunc 7y ago
  There is no realistic scenario where one civilization does not dominate others. Macro-history is fundamentally about the rise and fall of civilizations - the undesirable elements of this are consistent, but Western tradition and enlightenment has also given us democracy and science, and put us in a collective position where we are so relatively prosperous that we can look at the past with an inflated sense of shame.
  - dabbledash 7y ago
    Failing to see how this is responsive to parent’s observation that white privilege is a thing. Maybe you’re arguing that if the enlightenment never happened we wouldn’t have the set of egalitarian political values that cause us to give a shit about that. But even if that argument were true: the enlightenment did happen and we do care. And you’re not really articulating any reason we shouldn’t.
    - hyperdunc 7y ago
      I was just giving their observation some context. To address the idea of white privilege directly: - It's increasing racial awareness and conflict. - It's a blunt instrument that doesn't take into account the myriad of circumstances each individual faces (such as financial wealth, mental health and physical height). To provide a counter example to parent's, I'd rather be a rich ethnic minority unfairly stopped by a cop, than an ethnic majority person living in a trailer park and addicted to meth. The ethnic bigotry in this example isn't excused, but it's not the main concern. Perhaps, all else being equal, one could argue that 'white privilege' matters. But all else will never be equal. And the one place where equality really matters, it already exists - the law. Notions of privilege could at least attempt a full accounting at the individual level, rather than dictating in broad strokes.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

istjohn 7y ago

Slave labor built this country.

hyperdunc 7y ago
I don't see how such sweeping statements about the nature of a country are useful. Slave labor was only one component of practically all great countries/empires. The West was the first to outlaw it. The US in particular was built upon the hard-earned lessons of the past, including the moral worth of individual liberty.
- c0nducktr 7y ago
  How is the US in particular built upon the hard-earned lessons of the past. Because it is younger? This just sounds like more American exceptionalism that most of the world is tired of, and that includes many Americans.
  - hyperdunc 7y ago
    The counterpoint to your second sentence is that most of the world would sacrifice much to migrate to the US.
    - c0nducktr 7y ago
      Fine: USA, #1 when compared to developing nations. Got an answer to my first sentence?
      - hyperdunc 7y ago
        One example - the US Constitution draws from Ancient Greece and Rome, and is a response to the oppression of European monarchies. Louis XIV: "I am the state." US Constitution: "We the people...secure the Blessings of Liberty" That's no cosmetic difference.
        ascorbic 7y ago
        Sure, that was a big deal in 1776. But there's nothing exceptional about being a liberal democracy today, and there are plenty of countries that are more free than the US.
    - ascorbic 7y ago
      Most of the world is poor, and would like the chance to earn more money. That's nothing special about the US there. The same applies to most rich countries.
toasterlovin 7y ago
No it didn't. When it was legal, most inhabitants of the U.S. had no personal experience with slavery. It was critical to agriculture in the Southern states, but the North was the industrial powerhouse. And the states that constituted the North continue to be the most dominant region in the U.S. to this day.
rjf72 7y ago
There's an extremely interesting datum that most are not familiar with. In total in the transatlantic slave trade, about 12.5 million Africans were shipped to the New World. Of these, 10.7 million survived the voyage. And of those, about 388,000 thousand went to North America. [1] Up to 60-70k more would make their way North America eventually for a total of up to ~450k - about 4% of the slaves that made their way to the New World. North America's use of slavery was relatively low compared to many other places in the world. Even within the United States itself it's interesting to compare the states where slaves disproportionately ended up to those where they did not. And the Confederate/Union states works as a pretty solid proxy there. - Confederate: South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas - Union: California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and many others. Suffice to say, slavery does not seem have had a lasting positive effect for the states that most actively utilized it. Ultimately I think the reason slavery is more of a focus for the United States than other countries is not because of any unusual usage of slavery, but because of an extremely unusual outcome. For instance Brazil alone ended up taking on about 5 million slaves yet, like much of the south, has little to show for it. The point of this is not to say 'what about other countries' but to emphasize that the relative impact of slavery in the US was smaller than in many other places, yet we achieved vastly more than those places. So to attribute the exceptionalism of the United States to slavery, in any meaningful way, seems driven more by bias than logic. https://www.theroot.com/how-many-slaves-landed-in-the-us-1790873989 https://www.theroot.com/how-many-slaves-landed-in-the-us-179...

FussyZeus 7y ago

Except that Western civilization as in the minds of it's inhabitants likely wouldn't have existed without the subjugation and exploitation of those other societies, including but not limited to: China, India, the Middle East, most of Africa minus Ethiopia, and even some parts of Europe, and much more recently, South America. The West has largely won because it won a lot back in the day, and that inertia builds up and continues to favor us.

hyperdunc 7y ago
There is no realistic scenario where one civilization does not dominate others. Macro-history is fundamentally about the rise and fall of civilizations - the undesirable elements of this are consistent, but Western tradition and enlightenment has also given us democracy and science, and put us in a collective position where we are so relatively prosperous that we can look at the past with an inflated sense of shame.
- dabbledash 7y ago
  Failing to see how this is responsive to parent’s observation that white privilege is a thing. Maybe you’re arguing that if the enlightenment never happened we wouldn’t have the set of egalitarian political values that cause us to give a shit about that. But even if that argument were true: the enlightenment did happen and we do care. And you’re not really articulating any reason we shouldn’t.
  - hyperdunc 7y ago
    I was just giving their observation some context. To address the idea of white privilege directly: - It's increasing racial awareness and conflict. - It's a blunt instrument that doesn't take into account the myriad of circumstances each individual faces (such as financial wealth, mental health and physical height). To provide a counter example to parent's, I'd rather be a rich ethnic minority unfairly stopped by a cop, than an ethnic majority person living in a trailer park and addicted to meth. The ethnic bigotry in this example isn't excused, but it's not the main concern. Perhaps, all else being equal, one could argue that 'white privilege' matters. But all else will never be equal. And the one place where equality really matters, it already exists - the law. Notions of privilege could at least attempt a full accounting at the individual level, rather than dictating in broad strokes.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]