Black Lives Matter

[Globalgunner]

It is only worthwhile having a debate with people who are amenable to persuasion not someone who runs off on a tangent with a nugget of the issue at hand rather than the core matter. Someone with an insatiable need to win an argument rather than try to further everyone's understanding of crucial matters.

Slavery was not genocide to you because its object purpose was not to eradicate a people but which however had no regard for their innate humanity or the consequences of its execution?
What do you call cramming 800 people into decks of a ship knowing full well that less than 50% will survive the journey and throwing the dead bodies overboard?.
Where humans were being farmed like rabbits to breed more workers for the slave owner?. I guess you would term that anti-genocide?

Do you know how insulting your comments are to the sensitivities of other people?.

But of course you do. Thats why you run and hide from debate on Facebook because you cannot win an argument there and your most base statements would likely have you removed from your job. Try repeating the crap you spew here on Facebook and see how quickly you will be awarded your pink slip.

I have not forgotten how you used to pounce on any grammatical errors in a post to point and "Yippee" that you have now won the day.....until you dropped a few letter bombs here yourself.

You need to get over yourself. You have reached an age that qualifies for a second phase of self awareness. It will do you some good.

[Letters]

Slavery was not genocide because genocide is "the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group".
Not because I say so, because the dictionary does.
Now, by destruction I am taking to that mean killing. Hitler tried to eradicate the Jews, he literally rounded them up and killed them, that was a genocide.
The slave trade was not trying to eradicate black people, the people were its commodity - it makes no sense to try and destroy that.
So, by my understanding of the term I can't agree that the slave trade was a genocide.
THAT DOES NOT MEAN I THINK THE SLAVE TRADE WAS IN ANY WAY COMMENDABLE OR OK.
And hey, maybe there's a definition of the term genocide that I'm not understanding, I take it to mean the deliberate and systematic killing of a certain group, if the word "destruction" in the definition above can mean different things then maybe it could be considered genocide in a different way.

I'm interested to know what your basis for saying I "run and hide from debate on Facebook" by the way. Are we FB friends? I don't know your real name. I certainly don't do that on FB, I wonder why you think I do.

[Letters]

Imagine if I said in a public forum that Hitler wasn't all bad because he was the architect of the first autobahns. Which is also factually true.

Right. Well, if you were arguing against someone who said that literally everything Hitler did was bad then you'd have a point.
And saying that doesn't mean that you think Hitler was basically pretty decent, just misunderstood.
You can think that Hitler was "bad" and also think that him sorting out the roads was a good thing.
You an also think that Churchill was "good", as many do, and also think he did some pretty shitty things too.
People aren't "all bad" or "all good". And things can be bad without meaning every bad adjective applies to them

I like David Mitchell's writing about this sort of thing here

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...david-mitchell

[Globalgunner]

My sincere advice to you. Never go to Brixton or any gathering of black people and try and tell them what the dictionary definition of genocide is

We know what genocide is: We saw it in Rwanda and Burundi. We saw it in the former Yugoslavia

Live long and prosper

PS. You forget how many posts you start by saying "You were arguing with someone on facebook"

[Ollie the Optimist]

My sincere advice to you. Never go to Brixton or any gathering of black people and try and tell them what the dictionary definition of genocide is

We know what genocide is: We saw it in Rwanda and Burundi. We saw it in the former Yugoslavia

Live long and prosper

PS. You forget how many posts you start by saying "You were arguing with someone on facebook"

Aren’t those very different to the slave trade? If memory servers correct, those genocides were the deliberate actions in order to kill as many as possible.

The slave trade obviously wanted to keep as many alive as possible in order to make them work etc. Two different things although not saying one is worse then other.

[GP]

Slavers crammed as many onto the boats as they could, in inhumane conditions, knowing that half wouldn't survive the trip.

Is that the deliberate killing of a group of people? I'd argue so.

[The Wengerbabies]

Aren’t those very different to the slave trade? If memory servers correct, those genocides were the deliberate actions in order to kill as many as possible.

The slave trade obviously wanted to keep as many alive as possible in order to make them work etc. Two different things although not saying one is worse then other.

Exactly. The slave traders wanted to keep as many alive as possible, they weren't deliberately trying to kill them, they were trying to be as economical as possible which lead to shit conditions and the unfortunate death of many but the intent wasn't to kill them. To argue this is a genocide is illogical.

[The Wengerbabies]

Is that the deliberate killing of a group of people? I'd argue so.

[Globalgunner]

Exactly. The slave traders wanted to keep as many alive as possible, they weren't deliberately trying to kill them, they were trying to be as economical as possible which lead to shit conditions and the unfortunate death of many but the intent wasn't to kill them. To argue this is a genocide is illogical.

People crammed in a boat so tight that they had to sleep standing up. Economical?. Have you told the airlines about this?. There might be a reward in it for you

[Globalgunner]

The perfect poster boy for your point of view I would say