4 ms·

Humans don't need a species difference to dominate other groups and make them miserable, we're perfectly capable of selecting some other difference to create an

Humans don't need a species difference to dominate other groups and make them miserable, we're perfectly capable of selecting some other difference to create an "other".

pachico 6y ago
True, absolutely.
colechristensen 6y ago
Much of the history of the west’s treatment of africans was essentially justified by classifying them as lower forms of human. Romans did it to northern european “barbarians”, Europe and colonies did it do african and native american “savages”
- wolco2 6y ago
  And African's did it to other tribes. Who do you think sold the west the slaves in the first place. Tribes in central Africa would be sold through western African countries.
  - colechristensen 6y ago
    Again weird slavery denial responding to a comment that doesn't mention slavery.
  - pachico 6y ago
    And not only Africans: pre-Columbian civilizations did that to each other too. You don't become an empire just by handshakes and agreements.
- mistrial9 6y ago
  although well-meaning, I believe this is a shallow and Anglo-centric interpretation of history. Slaving was practiced across the world, and is generally regarded as "barbaric" because, well, it is. BUT the "West" did NOT make African Slavery.. Its incomplete to say that, and points fingers at modern people in the USA. I cannot start to give examples without a complete treatment due to the seriously toxic nature of this subject. But since I personally am descended from people in the USA that opposed slavery for the last 300 years AT LEAST, in EVERY FORM, I am sensitive, and strongly opposed, to a "guilt by association" on this topic.
  - AlotOfReading 6y ago
    I agree that discussions on this topic are generally toxic, but nothing in the GP directly assigned blame. It's more or less widely accepted in broader society that European colonialism laid the foundation for much of the modern world and many historians agree it was in turn partially justified by the "subeuropean-ness" of colonized peoples. I can easily show you papers published in the last decade continuing to justify historic colonialism as bringing civilization. There's an excellent (though dated) book on this called "Machines as the Measure of Men", which I often recommend to other people in tech.
  - colechristensen 6y ago
    What are you talking about, and how does it relate at all to what you are replying to? I didn't even use the word slavery , and I was talking about Rome and cultural attitudes of Europeans and their colonists. Then you go on about your 300 years of complete family opposition to slavery in the US which has only existed for 244 of those years... and you're speaking for ... eh thousands to tens of thousands of people? Calm down.

Humans don't need a species difference to dominate other groups and make them miserable, we're perfectly capable of selecting some other difference to create an "other".

pachico 6y ago

True, absolutely.

colechristensen 6y ago

Much of the history of the west’s treatment of africans was essentially justified by classifying them as lower forms of human. Romans did it to northern european “barbarians”, Europe and colonies did it do african and native american “savages”

wolco2 6y ago
And African's did it to other tribes. Who do you think sold the west the slaves in the first place. Tribes in central Africa would be sold through western African countries.
- colechristensen 6y ago
  Again weird slavery denial responding to a comment that doesn't mention slavery.
- pachico 6y ago
  And not only Africans: pre-Columbian civilizations did that to each other too. You don't become an empire just by handshakes and agreements.
mistrial9 6y ago
although well-meaning, I believe this is a shallow and Anglo-centric interpretation of history. Slaving was practiced across the world, and is generally regarded as "barbaric" because, well, it is. BUT the "West" did NOT make African Slavery.. Its incomplete to say that, and points fingers at modern people in the USA. I cannot start to give examples without a complete treatment due to the seriously toxic nature of this subject. But since I personally am descended from people in the USA that opposed slavery for the last 300 years AT LEAST, in EVERY FORM, I am sensitive, and strongly opposed, to a "guilt by association" on this topic.
- AlotOfReading 6y ago
  I agree that discussions on this topic are generally toxic, but nothing in the GP directly assigned blame. It's more or less widely accepted in broader society that European colonialism laid the foundation for much of the modern world and many historians agree it was in turn partially justified by the "subeuropean-ness" of colonized peoples. I can easily show you papers published in the last decade continuing to justify historic colonialism as bringing civilization. There's an excellent (though dated) book on this called "Machines as the Measure of Men", which I often recommend to other people in tech.
- colechristensen 6y ago
  What are you talking about, and how does it relate at all to what you are replying to? I didn't even use the word slavery , and I was talking about Rome and cultural attitudes of Europeans and their colonists. Then you go on about your 300 years of complete family opposition to slavery in the US which has only existed for 244 of those years... and you're speaking for ... eh thousands to tens of thousands of people? Calm down.