U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-28-2013, 04:43 AM
 
2,241 posts, read 2,662,778 times
Reputation: 424

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Handz View Post
I think most people are aware Hispanic/Latino is not a race but it is the only ethnicity in America that we pigeonhole into the racial paradigm..

Aside from Africans and Euros, of course.

Indians, Natives and Asians are exempt apparently.
Good points. Based on the USA Census, there is only one "ethnicity or ethnic group" which is Hispanic/Latino. I'm like hmm, why isn't their a Brittanic/Germanic ethnic group for English speaking Americans of any race? Lol

And there are Indians (of India) of different races as well. Same with Asians. There are Asians of different races. Also Asians is a reference to being an inhabitant of the continent or lands considered to be part of Asia. Technically Native Americans and Asians belong to the/a Mongoloid race lol.

Also it makes me wonder. Asiatic Russia was once connected to Alaska. It's interesting how Aleuts got classified as Native American and Alaska didn't become a USA state until much later on. Alaska was part of Russia as well. Most of Russia is in Asia anyways. So thats what makes these labels of race or continent problematic.

Europeans and Africans are all unique and have their differences and distinctness. Not all Europeans are homogenous. There are different cultures and tribes that have existed over time. There is also different languages spoken.

Africa is the most diverse INTRAPOPULATIONALLY. There are many different nations, tribes, and languages.

No one was ever a kin group. "Race" is limited and fallacious thinking and categorization. The only race really is the human race. No one can't point to where one race group starts or where one race ends.

It's all about economics essentially

 
Old 10-28-2013, 04:53 AM
 
8,101 posts, read 4,984,600 times
Reputation: 1578
Quote:
Originally Posted by MelismaticEchoes View Post
Ah ok! I gotcha. Thanks for clarifying
I meant Booker T Washington btw not Douglas lol
 
Old 10-28-2013, 05:12 AM
 
2,241 posts, read 2,662,778 times
Reputation: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomdude View Post
Just to comment on this, I think the problem is the US categorization of race.

Dominicans "dont know they are black" until they get to the US, because the US pretty much considers anyone with a drop of African blood "black".

This really should not be the way it is. Take a look at most of the pictures in that article. Those pictured are clearly mixed, and probably with many different things.

In the US, some may be considered black, or "black" Hispanic. In fact, in the US, darker shades of skin from Latin countries are often characterized as "black" by US people.

My g/f is a darker skinned Dominican, yet her half Dominican dad, and full Dominican grandmother, are both lighter skinned then me, and Im mostly caucausian with some Native. So, are they black? Her uncles and aunts cover almost the whole spectrum of shades of skin color, and they are all of the same parents.

I think its not a cool thing with how theyve conditioned Dominicans to believe African features are bad, such as they did here in the US with Natives for so many years, but I think that dividing a culturally distinctive group of blended people out by skin shade is crazy. I think, in that respect, Dominicans have it right, where the US has it wrong.

That is exactly why, here in the US, we have people who have been Americans for 6 generations or more still claiming that they are "Irish" or "Italian" or "African descent", while Domincans do not claim "African", "French" or "Spanish", they claim "Dominican".
Most Dominicans have more than just a drop of black African blood though lol. It's not a drop or even a splash. It's like a whole damn GALLON lol.
 
Old 10-28-2013, 06:52 AM
 
2,241 posts, read 2,662,778 times
Reputation: 424
Dominicans are very mixed race though. At the end of the day, identity belongs to the individual, not to anyone else. Live and let live.
 
Old 10-28-2013, 07:36 AM
 
20,611 posts, read 12,957,629 times
Reputation: 5904
Quote:
Originally Posted by calipoppy View Post
Oh Nyanna
Agreed. Sheesh!
 
Old 10-28-2013, 08:18 AM
 
15,303 posts, read 7,819,224 times
Reputation: 7930
Quote:
Originally Posted by MelismaticEchoes View Post
FYI, Wikipedia is not a valid historical reference.

Also in regards to slavery and my post that you quoted, this does not refute what I stated.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MelismaticEchoes View Post
Youtube is DEFINATELY not a valid historical reference.

FYI, both Wikipedia and youtube are websites that are heavily influenced by the populace, many of whom have their own agendas and POVs that are unsound and unproven.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MelismaticEchoes View Post
Some key points and facts to consider and keep in mind:

-The U.S. Chattel-Slavery SYSTEM was 'Mother-Based' (Matrilineal) --NOT 'Color-Based' (RACIAL),*

-Many WHITE people WERE Chattel-SLAVES in the U.S.*

-MOST Chattel-SLAVES in the U.S. WERE NOT BLACK (most were Mulatto or Metis and many were even White)*

-The U.S. received LESS THAN 6% of the West Africans captured*

-The 'Willie Lynch Speech / Letter' is a total HOAX*

-The Color-Based 'Slave-Hierarchy and Color-Based 'Features-Tests' are MYTHS
I will respond to your quote above:

1 - US Chattel Slavery was mother based but it was deemed to be matrilineal in order to make black women the mothers of slaves in the 17th century (I am speaking of the USA BTW throughout this discourse). Slavery WAS racially based - many colonies had "slave codes" that established a slave as someone who was "negroe, mullato, mestizo, or Indian." Basically anyone who wasn't white. Please read about slave codes in VA and SC in particular.

2 - White people were NOT chattel slaves in the US. Many white people were Indentured Servants. Indentured Servitude IS NOT slavery.

3 - This is partially true, a much greater amount of Africans went to the Caribbean and S. America due to them working their slaves to death in much greater numbers than US slave owners. In some areas of the USA there was a tendency to do the same, but here a slave was more likely than not, considered a valued asset and as such, this was not common practice - to work slaves to death, then import more - like it was done in the Caribbean and S. America.

4 - Did not mention Willie Lynch, I thought it was common knowledge it was a hoax. But the book regarding the Willie Lynch doctrines are based on the aforementioned slave codes which were laws governing the treatment of slaves.

5 - Slave Hierarchies by "hue" were common, but it depends on which portion of the country. For instance, lighter skinned slaves in LA fared better than lighter skinned slaves in GA. So this was a geographical phenomenon.

Please note, I base my views not on internet sites, which are faulty by design, especially Wikipedia but on text books, courses taken in college, and most especially slave narratives and historical papers (court documents, wills, etc.) that can be found in historical societies.

You should read some narratives, especially Olaudah Equiano, Frederick Douglass', Solomon Northrup (his is the one that the new movie "12 Years a Slave" is based on), Harriet Jacobs, and other texts that are based on historical documents like "Slaves in the Family" (written by a white man from SC whose family owned slaves and ran a rice plantation, my family was also from SC and worked on a rice plantation as slaves - paternal side- so I was excited when this book came out). Henry Louis Gates has a TON of books and texts regarding slavery and the black American experience (which is why I was so upset many years ago that he was hemmed up by police - he is a huge figure in African American studies, but I realize all are not history nerds such as myself and who would know of him like I do). Also the Spanish were in the US (Florida specifically in the 1400s and 1500s) and had Africans with them. People like to ignore that the Spanish had free and enslaved black people on their ships when they came to the US, which pre-dated the British, as did the French. St. Augustine, FL is the longest continually inhabited city in the nation and they had a black settlement near St. Augustine. Louisiana had different codes in regards to slavery and the life of slaves versus other portions of the country, most notably differences between LA and VA, as what I stated earlier - that VA was one of the first colonies to make slavery racially based, is true.

And the matrilineal slavery was a purely British creation. Prior to that, the condition of a child followed the father. Many historians and most people agree that this matrilineal chattel slave system formed in the colonies was a result of the white colonist seeking to make black equal to slavery and making sure that any sexual exploits with a slave woman would not lead to the birth of free children.

FWIW, I don't know why you are trying to argue with established history regarding chattel slavery in the US. I do not hold any sort of grudges and I don't think that the majority of black Americans do. It is what it is. Denying what occurred will not make it go away and it shouldn't make you feel guilty or anything because, if you are white, more than likely, your ancestors had nothing to do with slavery anyway since most white Americans are the descendants of recent immigrants.
 
Old 10-28-2013, 08:30 AM
 
15,303 posts, read 7,819,224 times
Reputation: 7930
Read more of the thread and Melismatic, it seems you like to debate yourself. Very weird discourse on here.

I would be interested to see your sources other than youtube or Wikipedia.

I have seen some doozies on Wikipedia especially, one that I need to go change myself when I get home if I ever remember to do so.

FYI, you should look at the sources on Wikipedia before believing what is written by the public is the truth. Many times the sources cited differ from what is written in the summarization. I am what I consider an amateur history buff. Many of the topics you are discussing and which I went into depth on are freshman level history class material so it is not some sort of conspiracy to cover up slavery. There are many actual documents that show that slavery was based on race from the late 17th century and forward, especially in the British colonies as this was written into law. Also, like I mentioned, there were many geographical differences in regards to the way black people (or mullato or mestizo or "quadroon" or Indian) were treated. The system can not be easily summed up due to this. You would have to do lengthy study of different states and areas of those states to get a good representation of what went on in those areas. FWIW, I know more about SC because that is where my dad's dad's (my grandfather's) family is from. I know about VA because that is where my dad's mom (my grandmother) is from. I am big into genealogy and local history so really do look into the history of the area my family is from in regards to discovering things about my family and the families who lived around my family (both black and white, I have met descendants of my dad's paternal lines slave owners because we have a unique name that was taken from them). To me, history is a living, breathing, fascinating experience and I do not seek to trivialize or politicize it the way some would like to. FWIW, you mentioned Ohio and my mom's family is from Ohio for a long time, the mid 19th century. Prior to that they lived in VA as well and KY, so I know a lot about those states too but the Ohio connection is very strong and her family had a lot of opportunities that my dad's did not due to living in Ohio at a time when they were not so openly terrorized and discriminated against like what was done to dad's family in VA and SC. Mom's family were land and business owners and were educated in integrated schools. Her family to this day is better off than my dad's so I know that legacy makes a difference.
 
Old 10-28-2013, 09:01 AM
 
50,025 posts, read 26,510,489 times
Reputation: 15626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julie_inFall View Post
I don't see nearly as many single white, Asian or Latino moms as I do single black moms in NYC. Usually it's mostly dark women that are single with children. Laugh at my comment, but deep down you know it is true.
I know that African American women have higher numbers of single motherhood than other races here.

I also know that it doesn't have a damn thing to do with being dark skinned.

C'mon...get real.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MelismaticEchoes View Post
You don't have to live HERE. If you want to go (back) to Africa you can go. No one is stopping y'all.

I think people should take more pride in their nationality and culture. It's a place many groups including blacks and slaves of all races and racial admixtures helped to build.
Who in the hell is "you" and "yall."
 
Old 10-28-2013, 09:44 AM
 
2,241 posts, read 2,662,778 times
Reputation: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
lmao...that might be the most ridiculous thing i've read on c-d today.

i mean, seriously?
+1
 
Old 10-28-2013, 04:49 PM
 
7,402 posts, read 5,891,446 times
Reputation: 3762
Quote:
Originally Posted by MelismaticEchoes View Post
Zoe Saldana received hate from some black people for her being cast in the role of Nina Simone, versa.

And Whoopie Goldberg received similar push back from some Latinos when some one was looking for a big named black actress (to attract box office) to play Celia Cruz.

Maybe some AAs didnt think that Zoe would capture the essence of being AA just as many Latinos didnt think that Whoopie would capture the essence of being an AfroCuban female.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top