View Full Version : Racist inter fans
I'm especially glad we beat them after all the racist abuse from their fans, especially towards Seedorf when he was substitued. And there was a close up of the Milan goal at a corner just after half time, and I'm sure I saw some bananas thrown at our players from the curva nord.
I hope our fans don't resort to this type of idiotic behaviour, and it only makes beating them even sweeter!
Plus you have to wonder how stupid they must be to make racist comments when they have so many black players in their team - adriano, martins etc etc.
I missed the comments but heard the boooing. What did they say?
Mostly they were making monkey noises at our players, especially Seedorf, and throwing banana's at the players. The commentators on British Eurosport picked up on it and called the inter fans 'disgraceful'.
Hopefully they will get punished for it :(
They have already been punished by Kaka!!! :)
Angel_Cic
27-02-2005, 17:31
that's shallow. just prooves how low and ignorant they are. but we'll keep making them look bad, at least by kicking their ass every time we play them ;)
Especially when you consider that they are sponsored by Nike who are involved in the 'Stand up, Speak up' campaign, and a lot of their players are wearing the black and white wristbands. I wonder if anyone from their club with be brave enough to stand up and speak up???
Angel_Cic
27-02-2005, 17:39
that's a good point. it's just truly shameful. i can't stand ppl like that. :groan:
I'm just glad its their lot, and not our fans. I hope the Rossoneri are more thoughtful and better behaved than that!
Especially when you consider that they are sponsored by Nike who are involved in the 'Stand up, Speak up' campaign, and a lot of their players are wearing the black and white wristbands. I wonder if anyone from their club with be brave enough to stand up and speak up???
thats an excellent point stefan, didn't see the game but the eurosport website where i was getting updates was saying it was a disgrace. Strange considering all the black players they have, if Davids was playing would they have done it and what about Adriano as well?
Well they brought on adriano in the same minute as Seedorf came off. They applaud one onto the pitch and make monkey noises at the other as he goes off. Figure that out????
i would bring myself down to actually typing what im thinking!!! plus id be kicked off the board...
its just a sign of losers.. and thickness
racism has no place in football or society, one of my best friends is black but thankfully he never really gets any abuse
IMO they can not be racist just because they have their beloved Obafemi Martins. Simlpy as that. End of worthless disussion.
PS: they try to offend Seedorf cuz he betrayed their team. Only for that ;)
All of it is racism. It's kind of a weird pattern of behavior in which one will be racist to the opponent's player yet love and appreciate their own "negroes".
We all have to watch out at who we call racist too. Because in many ways when we look deep down within ourselves, we have to ask the questions; When was the last time you had a man of color invited to your house as friends? Would you allow your children to marry across racial lines? How do you feel about a man of color being your employer or boss? Have you ever voted for someone to a government position of different race/races other than your own? Then the reality hits home! Maybe we are bigots too. It is easy to point the finger at every thing else with exception of yourself. Just trying to have us do a little self reflection ob this issue.
FORZA MILAN!
I think your points are totally invalid Kui, certainly for me personally. I have many black friends who I spend a large amount of time with socially. I would have no problem with a black man being my boss, or any of the other points you raised.
And whether or not you can agree with that personally, it certainly does not give fans of any club the right to racially abuse players from other teams, and resort to throwing bananas at them! It is totally unacceptable, and would be just the same if our fans did it.
My point is that when a club is involved in an anti-racism scheme in the way that inter are, then someone should be brave enough to stand up and condemn their fans for it. I would certainly expect Galiani, Ancelotti and all the players to condemn similar actions if they were by our fans.
Useless discussion. As I have mentioned, this offencive action can not be treated as a racistic abuse just because Inter has their own negro players. So if they really have racistic pont of view they should offend their own stars. This fact contradict to action.
PS: Am I a racist if I do not have ''coloured'' friends? [because my country's economical situation is too poor to have any immigrants] :rollani:
IMO they can not be racist just because they have their beloved Obafemi Martins. Simlpy as that. End of worthless disussion.
No, this simply shows that they are stupid.:rolleyes:
If you make monkey sounds to offend Seedorf you are an ignorant racist, even if players on your team, you boss, your wife and your fifth grade teacher are black.
No, this simply shows that they are stupid.:rolleyes:
If you make monkey sounds to offend Seedorf you are an ignorant racist, even if players on your team, you boss, your wife and your fifth grade teacher are black.
Yup, Inter fans never were the most educated people in the world. ;)
Although what is the link between blackman and monkey? Colour? Only colour? :rollani: We all are somehow related with apes ;) At least if someone denies Darwin's theory...
I think your points are totally invalid Kui, certainly for me personally. I have many black friends who I spend a large amount of time with socially. I would have no problem with a black man being my boss, or any of the other points you raised.
And whether or not you can agree with that personally, it certainly does not give fans of any club the right to racially abuse players from other teams, and resort to throwing bananas at them! It is totally unacceptable, and would be just the same if our fans did it.
My point is that when a club is involved in an anti-racism scheme in the way that inter are, then someone should be brave enough to stand up and condemn their fans for it. I would certainly expect Galiani, Ancelotti and all the players to condemn similar actions if they were by our fans.
No Stefan you wouldnt be a racist. And obviously the message I posted wouldnt pertain to you. And no Rae the obviously when it comes to people of color in wouldnt pertain to you. But racism isnt just directed at people of color. I'm talking about people of certain attitudes that refuse to inter-mingle, inter-marry, or even send their children to the same schools as others.
You'll be surprised to find out there are many people who consider themselves non-racist yet dont accept or practice any of the priciples that I mentioned above. Obviously I've made people very conscientious about themselves when pertaining to this race issue. Please note that my post was not made in any way to accuse anyone of being a racist. So I'm not too sure why you, Stefan and Rae were getting a little offended here. I just wanted people to firstly back-up and self reflect who they are as individuals. Thanks for your concerns.
FORZA MILAN!
Well, bascally I do not got offended at all. I jsut wanted to say that these days racism is treated not the exact conceptin as it written in dictionary. Now racism is everywhere and everytime. Too many speculations made about this issue. Word loses it's conception. This is my concern.
I do understand what you are saying. It's a word that does get thrown around a lot these days.
Although what is the link between blackman and monkey? Colour? Only colour? :rollani: We all are somehow related with apes ;) At least if someone denies Darwin's theory...
The ignorant try to make the connection with monkeys coming from africa and maybe too the color. But it is a really offensive way to classify any type of person.
Yup, Inter fans never were the most educated people in the world. ;)
Although what is the link between blackman and monkey? Colour? Only colour? :rollani: We all are somehow related with apes ;) At least if someone denies Darwin's theory...
I sincerely doubt that those Inter fans have read Darwin's 'Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection'.:evil:
The ignorant try to make the connection with monkeys coming from africa and maybe too the color. But it is a really offensive way to classify any type of person.
But we also are orginated form Africa, dont we.... so whats the matter.... :rollani:
The real europeans are homo sapiens and not homo sapiens sapiens....am I wrong...:rollani:
But we also are orginated form Africa, dont we.... so whats the matter.... :rollani:
The real europeans are homo sapiens and not homo sapiens sapiens....am I wrong...:rollani:
Allthough I may fit into you description of a "real European", I am actually Neanderthal, but noone seems to notice. :moan:
Allthough I may fit into you description of a "real European", I am actually Neanderthal, but noone seems to notice. :moan:do not get me wrong... I do say that we - homo sapiens sapiens are orginated in Africa and homo sapiens were found in Neanderthal walley so the can call themselves ''real europeans'' as we - ''real africans'' :D
But it is not the point. Is it true that black people are moneys or colser to them than white people. I guess no. So why to offend coloured man it is used monkey sound and to offend white man it is not used? :rollani:
As I have mentioned, this offencive action can not be treated as a racistic abuse just because Inter has their own negro players. So if they really have racistic pont of view they should offend their own stars. This fact contradict to action.
"Negro" is considered an offensive word in English. Just so you know.
Racists are not logical people. Maybe they support their own black players, but if they make monkey noises at any black player, this is unacceptable. I don't care if it's a former Inter player. If they treat him differently than they would a white "traitor", it's racism. And I didn't notice Pirlo getting any monkey abuse.
But it is not the point. Is it true that black people are moneys or colser to them than white people. I guess no. So why to offend coloured man it is used monkey sound and to offend white man it is not used? :rollani:
Did you just get spagetti stuck in your keyboard? Your spelling is normally better than that, I honestly don't know what you were trying to say.
"Negro" is considered an offensive word in English. Just so you know.
I thought that title Negro is some kind of place name, like Neanderthal.
And I didn't notice Pirlo getting any monkey abuse.Did you just get spagetti stuck in your keyboard? Your spelling is normally better than that, I honestly don't know what you were trying to say.
Ruffian did that. I just wanted to ask why white people do not get monkey abuse? WE ARE THE SAME PEOPLE, arent we? So why monkey abuse is not used to offend white people? I just do not get that. Maybe I am to stupid to conceive that. :sigh:
Rae... you are correct in your statement with regards to Darwin in which we all should originate from africa. Racist wont know or comprehend such a principle so they connect only black people with africa and monkeys only with africa. That's is the length of their stupidity because we all know monkeys/apes are found all over the world, not just africa. The bigot cannot comprehend this.
Yes the word "negro" and it's variations are offensive to people of color especially in the United States. It has a tendency to classify people in a negative conotation because of the history in which the word was used against people of color.
So you mean that all racist are fools. I can bet that there are some really clever people, though they are villain. So call racist=fool is a bit too risky. They also have their point of view, I guess, dont they?! :rollani:
No some are very intelligent people. But their ignorance supercedes their intelligence. And they lack some humanity or very not with the today world.
IMO they can not be racist just because they have their beloved Obafemi Martins. Simlpy as that. End of worthless disussion.
PS: they try to offend Seedorf cuz he betrayed their team. Only for that ;)
inter's hardcore supporters i.e. their ultras, have a far right political orientation, like tha lazio fans.
It is useless having Martins or any other god for them.
Scarce of humanity is not a reason to call him ignorant. Personally I am not a racist at all [can proove that :D], but I do not see any improvement in fight against racism. I reckon these methods are false. IMO first thing we have to do is to take profound look at racism's crux. Where does it come from? Why does it occur? Why do people use it? etc.
However, these days everyone say that racism is bad phenomenon and it should exterminated. And they use same methods racist use to them - kill eveything what it is related with it. Condemn people who are hesitating of their position i.e. are not sure that methods which are used now - are appropriate to cope with this phenomenon. It seems that there is no democratical virtues used when matter is conected with problem of racism.
PS: do you understand what I mean? :)
inter's hardcore supporters i.e. their ultras, have a far right political orientation, like tha lazio fans.
Far right political orentation is almost the same as far left. You know - circle has no corners or smth ;)
PS: I guess we are also a ''right orentated'' team, regarding Silvio :D
Just got back home, so I've clearly missed quite a lot of this thread going on. Kui I'm not offended personally, but I don't like the idea that we can somehow excuse racist behaviour by claiming that everyone might be racist deep down. I don't agree with that idea at all, and don't really see how a question such as 'would you want a black man to be your boss' has any real relevence to this discussion. I can kind of see where you're coming from with your argument, I just don't necessarily agree with some of it.
I also can't agree that this is a pointless discussion - I think that trying to put an end to racism in football is important and not something that should be overlooked. I'm not just complaining because its inter fans, but I find it difficult to comprehend people wanting to hand out racist abuse in the 21st century. I had hoped that we'd got past that kind of idiocracy by know!
As for the monkey noises, yes we might all originate from primates, but making monkey noises has a history of being linked to racism that stretches back for hundreds of years, so yes it is offensive. Why were these fans only making these noises towards our black players? Surely you are not suggesting that it was mere coincidence???
As for racists being intelligent people, I'm sure some are highly educated and could discuss Wittgenstein at length, but for me personally that does not make them intelligent. Yes they are allowed their viewpoints, but racially abusing a football player is very different to holding a polticial debate on race. I believe that intelligence is more than just qualifications and in my opinion racism is a sign of ignorance.
These of course are just my opinions and feel free to make any comments you like. I am certainly not having a go at anyone, and I hope that as Milan fans we can all get along, especially having beaten inter last night!
Forza Milan
I don't think Inter's "racist" fans can really be as serious or deep as Stefan. I just suspect they've gone frustrated, after 16 years without a (one) Scudetto and they hold to what they can to keep existing and being noticed. Therefore I believe their "racism" is unsubstantial parade. They can't invoke titles or direct victories against us, but on the other hand, frustration prevents them from being silent. So, they found this to confront us: "racism". Perhaps this is their last resort, when all the others, really connected to football, are invalid.
To put it on the joke side, maybe us, Milan, we are also to blame for Interisti's "racism": We beat them so often and wherever we catch them that they've turned dizzy for hunger and lack of victories and have come to see Martins... white.
FORZA MILAN!!!!!!!!!!!!
AC_Merda
01-03-2005, 04:17
I'm especially glad we beat them after all the racist abuse from their fans, especially towards Seedorf when he was substitued. And there was a close up of the Milan goal at a corner just after half time, and I'm sure I saw some bananas thrown at our players from the curva nord.
I hope our fans don't resort to this type of idiotic behaviour, and it only makes beating them even sweeter!
I know what you're talking about, but it's hard to tell if it was a banana. I think you're grasping at straws and trying to discredit Inter fans. And Seedorf was booed because he's a former Inter player, not because he's black.
That being said the Inter group "IRRIDICIBILI" have quite a few skinheads in their ranks. Unfortunate as rascism has absolutely know place in football, or in society for that matter, but that's the way it is.
Stefan. Take note that I wasnt excusing the behavior of racism at all. I dont know how you came to that conclusion that I was excusing any kind of racism. But racism comes in many different forms, not just with mere taunting words but how people feel about certain situations. Like I said, there are people who claim they are not racist but have a real problem having someone of a different ethnicity being their boss or even having a relationship with their relatives. So yes it is a point to consider because that kind of thinking is racism.
Listen people will have their own "tastes", "preferences", "biases" that will not fall under the term "racist". I know that! But if there are people who have problems seeing a white girl going out with a different looking person, I'm sorry, but that is bigotry.
Trust me Stefan I'm on your side on this one. But it is a difficult and touchy subject. Let's take Piacenza for example. Is it racist for them to have an Italian only football club policy? It can be hard to prove racism because they could make the argument that their policy is a matter of preference. I'm sure that those who made such a policy might not be racist, but there is no clear way to really tell. One way to prove it is if they were to sign someone like Liveriani or Ferrari to be sure that the policy meant "Italian" national and not mean "white" italians only.
But like I said racism goes well beyond just the taunts that the Inter Fans did that Derby night. I goes deeper than that into what people believe and how they think.
Scarce of humanity is not a reason to call him ignorant. Personally I am not a racist at all [can proove that :D], but I do not see any improvement in fight against racism. I reckon these methods are false. IMO first thing we have to do is to take profound look at racism's crux. Where does it come from? Why does it occur? Why do people use it? etc.
However, these days everyone say that racism is bad phenomenon and it should exterminated. And they use same methods racist use to them - kill eveything what it is related with it. Condemn people who are hesitating of their position i.e. are not sure that methods which are used now - are appropriate to cope with this phenomenon. It seems that there is no democratical virtues used when matter is conected with problem of racism.
PS: do you understand what I mean? :)
Yes I do. It ends up becoming a moral dilema because when trying to do good the method implemented to fix the problem ends up being immoral too.
but I find it difficult to comprehend people wanting to hand out racist abuse in the 21st century. I had hoped that we'd got past that kind of idiocracy by know!
Basically I do not think that this problem will be ever solved in entire world without any exceptions. It is unwarrantable to close yer eyes and say - peolpe of 21st century should be clever so they do not behave in racistic way. Or the same thing repeates when we are talking about technique how to solve a problem of racism. I mean we can not close or eyes and say - there is already made all appropriate methods how to cope with this problem. NO!!! There made plenty of mistakes made. And even till now these are not fixed. Because it is thought - ''there is only one right answer and we do not listen to any other adices cuz we have enough already''. IT IS FALSE!!! If there are no fresh ideas made - nothing will be achieved. As we see now racism is still in prosperity and it's theories are alive. So we should make some conclusions and we should change our type of fight against it. The last method is effectless. There is no need to continue doing the same falsified actions which give no benefit.
All efforts to cope with racism are inefficient and ridiculous to me. Should be made revolution in our comprehension of racism.
As long as we as people try our very best at stopping it in its track, it is better than giving up hope. It is hard to do. And you are correct that it will not stop the world from being racist. Those kind of people will be around all the time. The best thing we can do is to improve ourselves and not allow our children to carry such thoughts in their heads either.
As for racists being intelligent people, I'm sure some are highly educated and could discuss Wittgenstein at length, but for me personally that does not make them intelligent.
Quote from the president of MENSA Sweden:
"Nothing is as trying as an intelligent a**hole" :star:
Christopher
01-03-2005, 08:58
Quote from the president of MENSA Sweden:
"Nothing is as trying as an intelligent a**hole" :star:
To me racism is a matter of ignorance . . . and ignorance is a signal that one lacks intelligence . . . they might be smart, but they are not intelligent. We are talking about people who believe that skin color decides if one human is better then another . . . truly educated people realize that it is not the skin tone that makes a difference instead it is what is under the skin. If Africa had never been colonized by European and the US that continent could have been one of the most powerful . . . that is history which everyone should know.
If Africa had never been colonized by European and the US that continent could have been one of the most powerful
Don't get me wrong, colonialization was a horrible thing, but there are African countries that have screwed thing up big time all on their own. Nigeria, with all its oil, 50 years ago view as just as promising as South Korea. They've managed to ruin all opportunities. :(
There are multiple countries in the south east of Africa that have been independant for 40-60 years and that are loaded with natural resourses and still people starve :(
Again colonialization was dreadful, but at some point in time, after 50+ years of independance and with some countries being abundant in natural resources, responsability falls on those in charge.
To me racism is a matter of ignorance . . . and ignorance is a signal that one lacks intelligence . . . they might be smart, but they are not intelligent. We are talking about people who believe that skin color decides if one human is better then another . . . truly educated people realize that it is not the skin tone that makes a difference instead it is what is under the skin. If Africa had never been colonized by European and the US that continent could have been one of the most powerful . . . that is history which everyone should know.
That's not history. It's more like political rhetoric. And at that it isnt even accurate.
What the heck are you talking about Philly? What African country did the US colonize? I know freed african slaves went back to Africa and settled mostly in what we know today as Liberia. But I think you need a history lesson Philly.
Kui:
US didn't colonise any particular country but they did ship thousands and thousands africans to US to work as slaves. That's pretty much equally bad if you ask me.
Mostly they were making monkey noises at our players, especially Seedorf, and throwing banana's at the players. The commentators on British Eurosport picked up on it and called the inter fans 'disgraceful'.
****ing disgusting bastards
Kui:
US didn't colonise any particular country but they did ship thousands and thousands africans to US to work as slaves. That's pretty much equally bad if you ask me.
Yes it was bad. But realize too that:
The whole Americas was in the business of slavery. Of course it was done with the help of European maritime shipping too. Did you not realize that "small" matter. Portuguese ships sent slaves to South America, Spain to Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico. The French were also into the lucrative business of slave trading in Port Au Prince, Haiti. Yet you failed to mention the cullpabilities of these countries. Also the fact that many European nations had colonial and occupational governments in Africa as late as the 1980's.
Don't get me wrong, colonialization was a horrible thing, but there are African countries that have screwed thing up big time all on their own. Nigeria, with all its oil, 50 years ago view as just as promising as South Korea. They've managed to ruin all opportunities. :(
There are multiple countries in the south east of Africa that have been independant for 40-60 years and that are loaded with natural resourses and still people starve :(
Again colonialization was dreadful, but at some point in time, after 50+ years of independance and with some countries being abundant in natural resources, responsability falls on those in charge.
I partially agree to what you might be saying Henrik but the colonization itself and the boundary maps were made by the euorpean powers of that particular time, caused many of the problems that plague Africa today. The tribal and ethnical boundaries of the various peoples of Africa was in no way the same as that which was drawn up by the Europeans. Thus what was left was "free for all" for the African people when the colonial powers picked up their stakes and left. That is why with some nations the leaders only serve the interest of those who are afiliated with their respective tribe.
There is hope in the example of the new South Africa where KwaZulu, Xhosa and other Bantu peoples can rule in a democratic nation with principles of a "republic" so that total democracy does not infringe the rights of the displaced or minority.
Correcting this problem takes time. Sometimes a long time. But I see hope in Africa. The biggest problem facing them today is HIV and AIDS. It is here that perhaps the world community can help with.
To me racism is a matter of ignorance . . . and ignorance is a signal that one lacks intelligence . . . they might be smart, but they are not intelligent. We are talking about people who believe that skin color decides if one human is better then another . . . truly educated people realize that it is not the skin tone that makes a difference instead it is what is under the skin.It is not ingorance. It is some kind of belief. Or even lack of humanity. But you can not call all racists - stupid people. It is not correct.
If Africa had never been colonized by European and the US that continent could have been one of the most powerful . . . that is history which everyone should know.
:rollani:
Maybe after 500 years... or 1000...
I know freed african slaves went back to Africa and settled mostly in what we know today as Liberia. But I think you need a history lesson Philly.
Yup. US government bought some theritories in Africa and called it Liberia [place of liberty] And even it's capital was called in name of US persident Monroe. That land was aquired due to freed africans could get becj to their native land. Though only a few used this opportunity. Almost all of them were satisfied with life in US. Even racism was wide phenomenon there.
And one extra notice. Recently I have read one contravertial fact and some days ago it was confirmed by one broadcast of Discovery channel. According to scientists majority of black slaves, after their emancipation by northern states, joined southern army to stand by their masters to fight against invaders form north. That shows us that slaves loved their masters more than their ''rescue force'' form north.
Yes this is true that black soldiers did fight for the south. But not the really those living in the north. Most Blacks in the North had joined the Union thus forming the famous 54th Massachussetts Reg. Some Blacks in the south did indeed fight for the Rebel Armies. But the issue of slavery was a moral wrong in all principles. Some of these slaves had no choice in the matter to fight for the south. What some owners did was instead of fighting themselves the slave would serve that man's term of service for him. Another fact was that most southerners fighting for the CSA (Confederate States of America) werent slave owners put poor crop sharers/farmers. The American Civil War was fought for a number of reasons one of them being the question of Slavery. But that issue came later in the War with Lincoln's Emancipation proclamtion.
There has been some credible cases that a very very few number of blacks did support the south and the reason was that these few half dozen were slave/plantation owners themselves. Either way it is no excuse for putting someone in bondage.
Some did fight for the South but not a majority of them and surley not many from the north. Those that did for the South had done so involuntarily because it was at the behest of the owners who considered their slaves no more than just property. Most of their duties from both the North and South Armies involved non-combat and servitude tasks. The North's 54th Mass. Reg was a unit that did serve valiantly in battle. Actually almost to it's near total distruction.
You are telling me an old story which is in all school books. I do thought the same way though have some hesitations even then I do not knew some facts about slavery and reasons to start war. IMO civil war was inappropriate action by nothern states. They wanted to annex southern states though they were completely different countries. Comparing there economical tendencies, state power organs or social life.
PS: all already known facts which are widly spread are famous and ''politicaly correct'' though the truth was different as always. ;)
The social life was different yes. But the causes for secession on the part of the South was the issue of slavery. The north saw it as an issue of Union. And the North had no choice to enter the war because of the assault of Fort Sumpter that was provocation the south had started. It wasnt the cause for the war but it did light the short fused bomb that was just dying to explode. The only people in this country today that believe that the North was wrong to fight with the south is the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacy groups.
That doesnt mean that the north did not have it's share of bigots either. From the beginning of our republic our founders realize that the American revolution was not complete because the Declaration of Indepedence and the US Constitution pertained to only some men being equal and free. They had this fear that such inconsistency on the practice of what is a noble principle was going to end up in a conflict of war.
We can go on and on about the morals or lack there of about wars, but you are right that the Civil War was about a lot of issues. It would be accurate to say that the Civil War was about power. The South had felt the power to set agendas and policies of the whole United States was slipping from their grasps and it was beyond all their fears that they were going to lose it because of the expansion of the country, bringing in more "states" incorporated into the Union. Plus slavery was so archaic and for a nation to claim of the "free" we had this immoral stigma (slavery) still in our midst. Most of Europe had ended the principle of bondage at least in their homelands. The practice was archaic and with the rapid technology growth due to the Agricultural and Industrial revolution just brought foward in greater force the issue of slavery needed to end.
Most of America acknowledge that the Civil War was going to happen no matter what and luckily the Union won and was preserved. It took another 100years of struggles for civil rights and to this day the country is still dealing with civil rights issues. We've made progress but it isnt perfect and we are trying to work the kinks out. We've accomplished much but still have much to do.
By the way... the South was just as eager to fight in this war. So to blame the North as the agressors is a bit out there.
You are speaking like a North american who belong to that period of time. All yer arguments are based on their theories. So I do not need to say to you nothing cuz i feel that you wont be listeng to me, though I see you are keen american ;)
PS: though if I were at thet time in America I surely support south, for many reasons. I still suppose that they were the victim not agressor. Just look at the statistics - South had almost no chance. Bigger population and higher level of technological achievments etc. South possesed only bigger amount of quality soldiers or army officers. ;)
Listen I am not pro north or pro south. I'm pro United States of America. The whole package. Ironically the south did not lose any political power they had feared they were going to lose. They have always been a political player in American politics. Today they are a big power in American politics. The nation is not different just between the North and South boundaries. All fifty states is like a total different country. Gosh some states like Pennsylvania have a variety of cultures where some segments still speak Old Dutch and Old German. But you dont see them betraying or leaving the Union. Yes they have a different lifestyle but it does not include an archaic practice like slavery.
Well, United States of America is a state which was called North in Civil War. Just because it won the war and annex southern states. If God had decided different now we would have two different states. And I bet southern one would be much more interseting in many ways. Eventually I would have stand by south jsut because they fought for their state's independence and north wanted to goad with then and take their theritories. ;)
Yes that scenario could have well happened. But to remind you the North did not annex the South. The south was very much part of the United States. Another point of interest is that a good portion of the south did not want to leave the union and likewise a good portion of the north was indifferent to issue of slavery and seccession of the Union. The Civil War isnt clear cut to just NORTH and SOUTH. Part of Virginia did not want to leave the Union so they stayed with the North thus West Virginia is a state today. The war wasnt a clear cut Democrats vs Republican either because you had many democrats favoring an undivided and free nation. Furthermore at the end of the Civil War it was not like the South lost any of its territory. No Union state gained possesion or territory from the southern states. The southern states were reincorporated into the Union as equal partners.
For me personally... Thank God that we dont have slavery today. I'm not black but an indigenous inhabitant of my land. Who knows for sure but I'm certain that the harsh treatment commited against blacks might have been accorded to me also.
NOW if we talk about the United States' crimes against the American Indians. OK I have a lot of issues and grievances to deal to the government.
Please note that you are posing very good questions and issues that can be fairly discussed. You have some very strong points in your argument so yes I am very much listening to them. I'm just having a constructive debate which you in all fairness can counterpoint. I must say that you have brought up some good points, I may disagree with them, but they are good points. I understand that there are two sides to the issue. Continue please because the discussion is quite invigorating.
Rapierist
03-03-2005, 12:37
I do believe that the American Civil War was more of a power struggle than a righteous campaign to abolish slavery. But in the end it did reduce slavery to some extent in the newly formed Union. So, it did turn out to be the better option. As Kui pointed out, the Southern states still retained significant political clout, so the gains definitely outweighed the losses from that war.
About racism in general, well, I don't think campaigns with fancy names go a long way in softening the hearts of the racist people. It is a show of support but how far it goes towards achieving its objective is certainly questionable.
Also, racism is considered a social evil but only because it has a strong social and political lobby against it. Otherwise it is actually comparable to schoolyard bullying (which has also been known to incite violence). The only difference is that there is no lobby to oppose bullying. So it is not considered to be as serious as racism. We are also moving towards a trend where you can accuse someone of being discriminatory towards you (legally) if they make a comment about your weight. That might sound laughable compared to the level of evil that racism has been elevated to, but it is getting there.
You think people (white or coloured) are really bothered whether they treat people fairly or not, regardless of colour? A person who is morally responsible will definitely not indulge in racist behaviour. That person will also be very likely not to be a school bully and be conscious of whether the comments he/she makes upset other people. That is something that is only developed through proper cultural upbringing (friendships and interactions with different kinds of people). Not Nike's merchandise.
Also, (non-violent)abuse (racist or non-racist) needs to be treated equally by the people who are the targets of racism. There are some people who will trade insults like "motherf***er" and not be bothered at all, but will go into a paranoid media-frenzy if the abuse is remotely racist (Footballers being the prime example). A simple condemnation would be fine, rather than delving into the whole media campaign to eradicate racism.
For me personally... Thank God that we dont have slavery today. I'm not black but an indigenous inhabitant of my land. Who knows for sure but I'm certain that the harsh treatment commited against blacks might have been accorded to me also.I do coincide with you. I also do not fancy salvery. But I do reckon that slavery will be ended in south just like it was ended in south america ;)
Please note that you are posing very good questions and issues that can be fairly discussed. You have some very strong points in your argument so yes I am very much listening to them. I'm just having a constructive debate which you in all fairness can counterpoint. I must say that you have brought up some good points, I may disagree with them, but they are good points. I understand that there are two sides to the issue. Continue please because the discussion is quite invigorating.http://www.milanmania.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16600
Henrik has already created a theard which is quite a nice place to discuss about some things which are usually not related with football ;)
I do believe that the American Civil War was more of a power struggle than a righteous campaign to abolish slavery.
War is not an expedient to abolish slavery. The time had come and southern planters would made that by their own. Though it would be a bit harmful for them though, you know, if you do not try it on yerself no one can proove that to you ;) So I do not extenuate northerns that they wanted to free black slaves so they began war. Nevertheless, slavery abolishment was not the main and crucial reason why war was strated, but it was the most famous slogan to palliate their actions in the world. Many countries would have helped southerns but they could not do it cuz of slavery. However unofficial links were tight.
About racism in general, well, I don't think campaigns with fancy names go a long way in softening the hearts of the racist people. It is a show of support but how far it goes towards achieving its objective is certainly questionable.This way of softening hearts is completely fallacious, inapt and aggravating. Even sweet things sometimes starts to plague.
We are also moving towards a trend where you can accuse someone of being discriminatory towards you (legally) if they make a comment about your weight. That might sound laughable compared to the level of evil that racism has been elevated to, but it is getting there.Golden words. Political correctness and euphemism make me feel eager and zeal to fight against. It feels like if we say the word in softer manner - automaticly you become tolerant and not racistic. This thought make me insane. I can not reconcile with that. IMO it is the significant problem of today's life. :crazy:
Basically I do not care what would be my wife black or white or yellow [cuz I love women in general], as well as what colour would be my children - they would be MINE. So I can not call myself one who has phobia of different races.
PS: I prefer morenas to rubias :D
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.