Yeah, those dumb honkys need to just shut up and stop whining or they'll never be equal.

Black History Month is dumb not because "there's no white history month", but because black history is American history and it should be talked about alongside everything else, all year long.

The issue is whether or not certain teachers of different persuasions try to revise history or pretend like certain centuries-long institutions didn't really exist or weren't that bad. Black history month is a way to force them to talk about it and to try and insert black figures into kid's heads.

It's a bit obsolete, but in the end not some horrible thing.

The average African American family has had a longer ancestry in this country than the average White American. Black History Month is, like, a super-American celebration.

ballza Ol' Teddy:
"There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all … The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic … There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a ballza American. The only man who is a ballza American is the man who is an American and nothing else."

"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country."

>>65752

Except the only thing slavery got the people who actually owned large numbers of slaves (the south) was the opportunity to be blasted back to the stone age by the union army.

>>65760
The irony is that it wasn't the majority of people who actually owned slaves that suffered the most, like normal it was the poor southerner who was duped into fighting a stupid war they could never really win, and instead of blaming the rich assholes who were willing to start the war to protect their huge cash stockpiles, they just hated black people more. It's human nature I suppose, it's much easier to hate the guy in the town over (DC) than your neighbor (the huge plantation owners who stirred up the shit in the first place).

Aren't most months "white history" months? Most of what I was taught in history classes was white people shit. February was basically the only time we were taught anything other than white people history with token Asian history and whatever.

>>65764

Really? We started out with Sumerians and Harappans. I mean it depends on who you consider white. The Romans were dark as fuck, and so were the Greeks. The Egyptians? Fuck, it dude.

>>65764
Maybe if the negroes had ever done anything worthwhile we'd need more than a 28-day month to learn about their history.

>>65766
Romans and Greeks were white people. Egyptians and the whole Mesopotamian area are not white people.

The Mayans, Aztects, Toltecs and Olmecs had rather impressive civilizations too and they were not white.

Can anyone help me find more of that pumpkin guy?

>>65782
http://www.deviantotter.com/tour/video/367/

While trying to fulfill your request, I came across this. He's cuter.

>>65761

What I was getting at, in response to >>65752, is that society at large did not benefit from slavery, as you so eloquently put yourself. The picture argues that slavery enriched all white people, when the truth is it only enriched a small minority of white people. If reparations are asked, they should only be asked of the top 1%.

The average person never benefited from slavery (slaves compete with paid labor), and probably suffered greatly because of it.

I mean it took fucking FDR to rebuild the south, which until that time was considered the sick man of America.

>>65789
Also it pisses me off that black people think they're so special because they were slaves. Slavery has been a thing throughout history in all parts of the world, including America before it was discovered by the Europeans. Then there's the whole huuuge history of antisemitism which dates back to ancient Rome. I'm not saying any of these things weren't unfortunate and terrible, but I am saying black people have to stop pretending they're so special because they suffered. Groups of people have been persecuted for every reason imaginable throughout history and black people aren't even the most recent. During WWII Japanese people were locked up in interment camps, and then there was the whole McCarthyism thing. Honestly the best thing for racism would be if everyone just stopped giving a fuck and forgot about it.

>>65792

>Honestly the best thing for racism would be if everyone just stopped giving a fuck and forgot about it.

That's a little hard to do when it's still deeply embedded in our cultural and political institutions.

>>65792
"Slavery" as we saw it throughout history was a different beast than African slavery that we saw in the South. Which is to say, African slavery in both the US and in European colonies was frankly worse.

Slavery in the ancient world was one of two flavors: 1) attempts (however cruelly and bluntly) to bring a foreign culture into their own or 2)simple forced labor of a native population that is described as slavery by historians (most slavery in Africa was of this flavor). Romans and other cultures that had 1 as its type saw slavery as a way to erase whatever cultural identity they had before and assimilate them into Roman identity. Many slaves were educated and worked in skilled fields, and many were also freed. Their children were often born free as Roman citizens. And over time, even Romans looked to phase it out, and did. It was too immoral in the long run even for them.

Slavery in the South and other parts of the new world took on a decidedly different flavor. Southern culture built the idea of blacks as being almost entirely subhuman, or at least a lesser race of humans, that should and would be enslaved forever for... well, free labor. Unsurprising that was what it was all about all along. Poor folk in the south went along with it because so long as honkys were around they weren't the bottom of the food chain. Some slaves were freed, but they were forced to go to the north in most situations if they actually wanted to live anywhere close to freely. The moral sickness was eventually ended by Europeans and then ended by Americans, necessarily, because they recognized like the Romans did that it was just too fucked up.

>>65797
That may be true but still the Jews suffered all that racist subhuman shit way longer than the blacks did. I'm not well versed in genocides but those happened throughout history too, attempts to destroy entire peoples. To me enslavement seems a tad better than just being massacred. Jews got over it though. They made Schindler's List and then mostly shut up and moved on. This is despite the fact that Jews are STILL persecuted to this day (Israel, the recent Jewish exodus from Ukraine).

It sounds like I'm writing a sob story for Jewish people now but that's not my point. My point is black people making a big fucking deal about something while another group who's had it way worse for way longer is just dealing with it. It seems like they're playing the victim for handouts, and I realize that's overgeneralizing but I'm mostly talking about the mentality a lot of people have around black slavery.

>>65798
You realize of course that Jews justified making their own nationalist state and continue to justify bombing the fuck out of Muslims by shouting out about the Holocaust and how much everyone has hated them for so long? The Jews have milked it, is all I'm saying. They've milked their oppression to degrees that blacks never have. Nobody disputes the Jews have been through some shit, but the Jews are a much smaller group than blacks, both internationally and in the US.

In any case, in the US, Jews have never had half of the fucked up oppression that they faced in Europe and elsewhere. At the same time shit was going on in Germany, they were already taking over Hollywood/the banks/TV. ballza on them as far as I'm concerned, they look out for their own. But they haven't had to deal with half the shit blacks had to in US history.

Blacks were for-real enslaved (not just '1500 years ago enslaved') for hundreds of years and then were still treated as subhuman by the government (to say nothing about the general populace) until 40 years ago. Any gains they then made in the middle of the century was reset and probably backtracked by the crack epidemic.

So basically you're saying that blacks should just get over it and make progress after hundreds of years of systemic oppression and then twenty years of severe cultural setbacks to the point where they could only make progress for the last 15 years or so, when it took Jews about 100 years to do the same thing in the US.

>>65779
Rather impressive for a bunch of morons.

>>65801

Stop making the bigot look bad.

>>65801

The funny thing is, in any African American History course, the first thing they teach you is that the Arabs were responsible for the African slave trade.

So in a sense, the Muslims are simply paying reparations.

>Blacks were for-real enslaved (not just '1500 years ago enslaved')

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_emancipation#Dates_of_emancipation

>>65827
Emancipation is legal equality, not freedom from slavery. Blacks didn't achieve full legal equality (abolishing the inherently unequal 'separate but equal' and Jim Crow laws) in many parts of the US until the 70s, but even that is disputed. It does come down to how someone might define legal equality, though, I'm sure each one of those cases can be taken in different ways. In any case, they weren't actively being enslaved, they just tended to live in insular communities and weren't given the same suite of rights others were afforded.

That's not to say they had it great, but they weren't bought, sold, and treated like livestock.

>>65831

One could argue that Jews suffered inequality longer than blacks (1000 years vs 100 years). But that argument would ignore the important role jews played in the civil rights movement. Specifically, the length of inequality does not render one superior, but rather those with recent experience of it can commiserate with the other.

And most European jews were reenslaved/killed in the thirties/forties.

>>65838
Again, I think it's best to try and localize the issue to the US, as trying to compare black slavery in the new world to Jewish oppression worldwide is sorta not the same fruit. In the US, Jews were never systematically oppressed. There were plenty of anti-semites and there weren't that many Jews at all here for a long time. Places where Jews were never really accepted still have problems with them today and Jews still have to deal with these problems. They never fully got over the oppression, or moved passed it as you claim. They still live in insular communities trying to do their thing and they still have to deal with various groups.

They are able to do so well in the US because they were never really fucked over like the blacks were, a lot of them even shed their Jewish identities, changing their names and suppressing their culture, in order to get ahead. At a certain point they just stopped pretending and then people noticed how many of them there were.

>>65831
>Emancipation is legal equality, not freedom from slavery.

Your negroes have had both for a long time now. If they are choosing to spend their welfare money on crack-cocaine and malt liquor and sit in their ghettoes all day whining about da man instead of taking advantage of the numerous programs designed to get them out of such situations then it is not the State's fault.

>>65846
I'm tired of that insular as fuck mentality. We can and should look to other countries as objective examples of how race relations can work. As opposed to pulling all of our solutions from fantasy land. It's like enforced ignorance, only this time, from the left.

>>65858
"A long time" is a relative term. They've only had equal citizenship in the south for about 40 years. No one disputes this. And no other race, whether they be the Irish or Jewish or whatever the fuck has just been able to 'get over it' in 40 years and their hill was decidedly much less steep. Expecting any culture to pull itself out of the dregs in 40 years after hundreds of years of being treated like livestock and then treated like sub-citizens not worthy of basic rights. European immigrants had to deal with derision, slums, and employment discrimination, which is bad, but not the same.

>>65860
I'm not really sure what you're talking about but we can't really look to other countries on this issue because there is no apt comparison, and when there is something that gets close, it tends to end in shittiness that we don't want to emulate. Like the holocaust, either the Turkish or the German one. In general Europe and most of the world is much LESS experienced at dealing with cultural and racial diversity in any successful or non-genocidal way. I look at something like European racism against blacks and it seems so... cute. Like Fischer-Price's Multicultural Assimilation. Europeans are really ballza at hating other whites, of course, but when it comes to blacks and sand people living in their countries they don't even

>>65861
Blacks and sand people are not native to Europe. I hate to dig up this argument once again but no, some negro fresh out of the jungles of the Congo is not and will never be as French as Jean-Pierre of Paris whose ancestors have lived there for 2,500 years. This is contrasted to the New World where everyone arrived around the same time and no one really has any more connection to the land than anyone else (except the Indians but you killed them all). Citizenship just doesn't work that way in the Old World.

>>65864
You've clearly never been to Paris. There are many Parisians with African ancestry who have lived in Paris for more generations than native, white Parisians. There are entire fucking districts in Paris that are nearly all black. It's pretty much an impossibility to go a day in Paris without seeing a black person. Pick a real French city. Paris isn't even considered French by most French people.

>I'm not really sure what you're talking about but we can't really look to other countries on this issue because there is no apt comparison, and when there is something that gets close, it tends to end in shittiness that we don't want to emulate.

They look at us as an example of shittiness, so both parties can't be right. Honestly, if you only look at "ballza" examples, you're just whitewashing over reality.

>Europeans are really ballza at hating other whites, of course, but when it comes to blacks and sand people living in their countries they don't even

Yeah, no.

>>65869
You think that suddenly makes these Negroes French?

>There are many Parisians with African ancestry who have lived in Paris for more generations than native, white Parisians.

The difference is that those native White Parisians are transplants from other regions of France and these Africans are transplants from, well, Africa. Imagine if some guy breaks into your house and takes a nap in your living room while you're in the bathroom, then when you leave the bathroom and go to the living room the guy says "hey m8 I've been in the living room longer so this is my house now :^)".

>>65901
I think the point was just that there aren't that many native Parisians with longstanding ancestry in Paris. But by your example, the only real Americans are Native Americans and much of Europe is occupied by false people as well. Actually the only real people would be Africans. So, real people colonized Paris, not fake French.

>>65931
Well no. Whites and blacks have been in America for about the same amount of time and have the same amount of connection to the land, and you killed all the Indians anyway so it's kind of a moot point. And yes if you go back far enough all humans come from Africa but that seems like such an arbitrary point to stop at. Go back even further and we're all free-floating molecules of RNA in a primordial ocean. Check your multicellular privilege you eukaryotic shitlord.

>>65931

They were killed by their own government. Which filled out its power base with transplants from rural communities, who were more politically reliable.

http://www.clausewitz.com/readings/Jacobsen-TheWarOfTheCommune14.htm