(01-31-2018, 07:52 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: This is like suggesting that the French and German are both citizens of the same place and are members of the same society. 

You're getting on Fred's case for accuracy while promoting gross ignorance on your own part to try and make a point that African tribes sold out their own people when that's not the case. 

(01-31-2018, 06:06 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You go with the fact that rival tribes that occupy the same land cannot be part of the society and I will go with they can. I will also suggest that there were a number of slaves sold into slavery by there very own tribes to pay off debts, punishment for crimes ect... 

Of course you can feel free to call it promoting gross negligence if you wish. When I was in Afghanistan warring neighbors would fight each other depending on what warlord they served. In Bosnia I witnessed the atrocities that Serbs did to Bosniaks, but they were all part of the same society and same citizenship. Just because the Jets didn't like the Sharks doesn't mean they were not the same.

It is nothing like the French and Germans, but I will refrain from calling that correlation gross ignorance; simply one, which with, I disagree. 

   

(01-31-2018, 08:13 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: This is called an anachronism. You're applying a modern concept (citizenship based on your country) to slave trade era Africa. The thing is, their society was based on the family unit or tribe. There was not "country". A neighboring tribe, just because they're close by, would not have been the same society. You wouldn't consider someone from that tribe a "citizen" of your tribe or "your own people". Even if they had a shared ethnic background, this did not play a role outside of any sort of alliance or the few kingdoms that existed at that particular time. 

This is why coastal people mostly went inland for slaves. They weren't their own. Sure, a minority of slaves were criminals and there was indentured servitude (which is different from slavery), but not enough to promote the repeated historical inaccuracy you're trying to push as a point. 

(01-31-2018, 08:26 PM)BengalYankee Wrote: Monument in Savanah Georgia representing Haitians fighting for Americans in the Revolutionary War!!!

What they don't teach in our schools

 
Trump and some members here need to know their history...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40Zyv6MpXRw




Did Norway help us in the Revolution War?

(01-31-2018, 08:41 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Haitians helped because the French ordered it.

(01-31-2018, 08:41 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Haitians helped because the French ordered it.

(01-31-2018, 08:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I said, you are free to consider these members of warring tribes to not be of the same society, just don't claim "gross ignorance" when someone asserts they were all part of the same society; perhaps even the Songhai Empire.

Could be that you re using modern concepts of society or citizens to dispute the words used. 

Quote:The point made was that African people enslaved themselves and sent many of them to America where less that 100 years after our creation we fought to free them from that slavery. While another poster tried to paint our fighting for the freedom to paint the US as a Nation in a negative light.

Quote:If Germans enslaved French and sold them; would it be fair to say Europeans sold their own into slavery?  

Quote:Would you consider these tribes that rely on shared resources to be part of the same society?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/thousands-massacred-as-two-tribes-go-to-war-in-south-sudan-6286342.html

(01-31-2018, 10:19 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: but they didn't enslave themselves. There was no pan African identity in the 1600's. Statements like "Didn’t the African people sell off their own people" and " many African countries did to their own citizens"  are just wrong and the point they're trying to make are flawed because they depend on the faulty premise that a society committed atrocities against its own people. Warring tribes would enslave their defeated enemies. Those that supplied the vast majority of slaves to Europeans were the West African Kingdoms that rose by marrying off their daughters to Europeans, getting armed by these slavers, and enslaved people from the inland areas. Beyond the occasional criminal, societies weren't enslaving their own.

(01-31-2018, 08:26 PM)BengalYankee Wrote: Did Norway help us in the Revolution War?

(02-01-2018, 09:30 PM)Dill Wrote: Well Bpat you are free to use social concepts, such as tribes and nations to mark one society from another.

But others of us are free to make RACE a maker of "society."  (Not for Europeans because that would be silly. Europeans are from different nations.)  Anyway, with race as the basis for defining groups, you could treat subsaharan Africa like one "society" with all black folks.

Then if the Ghanese sell Tuareg to Malians, they are indeed selling "their own people."

Imagine some poor Tuareg sitting in a Malian slave pen, unable to understand their language, religion or customs. He might be thinking--"My gosh--what kind of people enslave themselves? Why do the Malians treat their own people this way?? I may not be a citizen of Mali, but I am sure as hell a citizen of Africa!! Says so in my passport!" 

Anyway, if we define Americans by one race, then maybe they never sold their own people either.  Africans did that.

So when we fought the Civil War, we were undoing all that damage Africans did to their own people. That is a good thing.  Let's stop blaming Americans, who would never sell their own, for the sins of Africans, who obviously did sell their own.

(02-01-2018, 09:48 PM)Dill Wrote: My God . . . have you totally forgotten the Wikingas unit which stood shoulder to shoulder with the colonists at Breed's Hill in '75??

(02-01-2018, 10:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Pat and I had a healthy back and forth and not once did either of us make it about race; you made it to your second paragraph.

If you do not consider many cultures of sub-Saharan Africa to be members of grouped societies; that's your choice. But shre your race-baiting comments with other willing to join the fray.  

(02-02-2018, 04:08 AM)BengalYankee Wrote: Hahaha,

Nice try with the "fake news" you actually had me look up "Wikingas unit". 
But what I posted was real, we owe a lot to our Haitian Brothers with both to the Revolutionary War and even more with the Louisianan Purchase.

If this news was learned in school, I think our treatment over the years toward the Haitians would be far different.

All I learned in School was that ...


The first permanent settler in Chicago was named Jean Baptiste Point DuSable. He was born on the island of Haiti around 1745 to a French mariner and a mother who was a slave of African descent. DuSable was educated in France.

(02-01-2018, 10:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Pat and I had a healthy back and forth and not once did either of us make it about race; you made it to your second paragraph.

If you do not consider many cultures of sub-Saharan Africa to be members of grouped societies; that's your choice. But shre your race-baiting comments with other willing to join the fray.  

(02-02-2018, 12:24 PM)Dill Wrote: I'm with you on honoring the Haitians BengalYankee.  That was a good post.

(02-02-2018, 03:42 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: I'm curious how many of us on the board have been to Sub-Sahara Africa. I'm not trying to call anyone out here. But I am curious.

I have not. I have met several people from there. I've learned enough to not trust stereotypes or the short glimpses we get from media. For example, a lady in my Sunday School class is from Nigeria. She was just telling me this weekend about how people from the different tribes and different religions (primarily Christianity and Islam) interact there. It is far more intricate and complicated than I would have imagined, with much more cooperation rather than conflict or disagreement.

(02-02-2018, 04:34 PM)Dill Wrote: Southern Morocco is the closest I have come.  Funny, we have a Nigerian student in our student rental now. A really nice person who brought us a fish dish for Christmas.  She seems a little shy discussing her country, though.

By the way your post reminded me of a point made by the scholar of ethnic conflict, Donald Horowitz: "An Ibo may be . . . an Owerri Ibo or an Onitsha Ibo in what was the Eastern region of Nigeria. In Lagos, he is simply an Ibo. In London, he is a Nigerian. In New York, he is an African."   Where "those people" see a rich and layered diversity of peopleS on their own continent, including myriad tribal/national histories, we often don't.

(02-02-2018, 04:49 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Yes. And we often get videos on the media from "the backwoods" of these countries showing the latest terrible conflict happening there and we tend to think that that is how it is everywhere in that country. It's like someone from another country watching news from America about the Branch Davidian standoff and walking away with an idea that that is how it is everywhere in the U.S.

Nigeria has some large, sophisticated cities similar to our own:



That is Lagos.