Rapierist

Kui · 03-03-2005, 10:08

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.

Kui · 03-03-2005, 10:13

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.

rae · 04-03-2005, 07:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kui

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kui

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rapierist

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rapierist

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rapierist

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.

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

03-03-2005, 10:08	#61
Kui Registered User Join Date: 05 1999 Location: I ke one a Kaku'ihewa Fave Players: Roby Donadoni, Chico Evani, Franco Baresi	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.

03-03-2005, 10:13	#62
Kui Registered User Join Date: 05 1999 Location: I ke one a Kaku'ihewa Fave Players: Roby Donadoni, Chico Evani, Franco Baresi	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.

03-03-2005, 12:37	#63
Rapierist Registered User Join Date: 07 2002	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.

Kui

Kui

Rapierist

rae