TRUMP - Some people think......... How do you feel?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Kimmio said:
But that didn't happen. It could have, it might not have. But it didn't. You can't conclude moral equivalency with something that didn't happen. That's like making up alternative facts to support an argument.
Click to expand...
My point is that those with power tend to abuse power. The powerful oppress the less powerful. That's why, in the days before European colonization, some African tribes conquered, oppressed and/or enslaved other African tribes, leading to hatreds that still exist to this day - many of which were made worse by European colonization and the arbitrary drawing of national boundaries in post-colonial Africa that forced tribes that hated each other to try to co-exist within a single nation-state. The tragedy of Rwanda is a perfect example of that. If African tribes could conquer, oppress and/or enslave other African tribes (which they did - and that is a fact) then it's not really a stretch to say that if they had possessed the power to do so, they would also have conquered, oppressed and/or enslaved Europe. That's not an alternative fact. That's simply an observation based on human nature and history. It's not a fact (alternative or otherwise) and I don't claim it as a "fact" because, indeed, it never happened. I do claim it as a likely scenario had the power imbalance between Europe and Africa been reversed.
 
Graeme Decarie said:
Oh, Kimmio. That's racist statement. Your suggesting that some human groups would do something, but others wouldn't.
I'm afraid we are all capable of some pretty vile behaviour.
Click to expand...
It's not a 'racist statement' for crying out loud! You can't call a minority group out on something that didn't historically happen, even hypothetically, and then somehow use that as a valid factual argument for why all humans are equally vile.
 
There is the problem of the"noble savage" concept. It's based on the idea that as a result of European guilt over colonization and the treatment (and even genocide) of indigenous people some have constructed an almost utopian image of the pre-colonial indigenous societies, so that everything pre-European was harmony and bliss and then Europeans showed up and ruined everything. That is actually a very patronizing portrayal (perhaps even racist) because it de-humanizes those societies. They were as human and as capable of evil as any European society. They fought wars and killed and conquered and enslaved others. Again, that does not absolve Europeans or European colonization of the horrible actions of the colonizers and the repercussions of colonization that continue to this day. Nor does it absolve those of us who have inherited their privilege from working to do away with the disastrous consequences of colonization. But it does allow everyone to be seen as equally human.
 
revsdd said:
There is the problem of the"noble savage" concept. It's based on the idea that as a result of European guilt over colonization and the treatment (and even genocide) of indigenous people some have constructed an almost utopian image of the pre-colonial indigenous societies, so that everything pre-European was harmony and bliss and then Europeans showed up and ruined everything. That is actually a very patronizing portrayal (perhaps even racist) because it de-humanizes those societies. They were as human and as capable of evil as any European society. They fought wars and killed and conquered and enslaved others. Again, that does not absolve Europeans or European colonization of the horrible actions of the colonizers and the repercussions of colonization that continue to this day. Nor does it absolve those of us who have inherited their privilege from working to do away with the disastrous consequences of colonization. But it does allow everyone to be seen as equally human.
Click to expand...

Is this like feral sacred Ness? Intelligence wildly confined ...
 
revsdd said:
There is the problem of the"noble savage" concept. It's based on the idea that as a result of European guilt over colonization and the treatment (and even genocide) of indigenous people some have constructed an almost utopian image of the pre-colonial indigenous societies, so that everything pre-European was harmony and bliss and then Europeans showed up and ruined everything. That is actually a very patronizing portrayal (perhaps even racist) because it de-humanizes those societies. They were as human and as capable of evil as any European society. They fought wars and killed and conquered and enslaved others. Again, that does not absolve Europeans or European colonization of the horrible actions of the colonizers and the repercussions of colonization that continue to this day. Nor does it absolve those of us who have inherited their privilege from working to do away with the disastrous consequences of colonization. But it does allow everyone to be seen as equally human.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. I do not agree with whoever's making false equivalency between what did happen and what 'could've' happened, in order to say "they" are equally as vile as "we" have been.
 
Kimmio said:
I agree with this. I do not agree with whoever's making false equivalency between what did happen and what 'could've' happened, in order to say "they" are equally as vile as "we" have been.
Click to expand...
There cannot be any type of equivalency between what actually happened and what could have happened - since one happened and one didn't. However, it is valid to point out that all human beings are human beings, capable of doing evil.
 
There is some suggestion, however, that the way that hunter-gatherer societies both functioned and interacted was fundamentally different to some of the principles and interactions of the agrarian nation-state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top