posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
Slavery in Libya is hoax that was created by the (not really liberal) media
I did this video on how its a hoax last year
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK6HW1kwJb4

Others did similar.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJ8sBhtztWk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U85q-qKJFDY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSXKdxdPRO8

---

Posts: 297 | From: Bronx | Registered: Apr 2018  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Black Crystal:
So all the photos published online of Blacks enslaved by Arab Libyans are a hoax? You know I can spam this thread with photo after photo after photo of Blacks being held in captivity in Libya. You want me to believe they're fakes?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fourty2Tribes:
Slavery in Libya is hoax that was created by the (not really liberal) media
I did this video on how its a hoax last year
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK6HW1kwJb4

Others did similar.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJ8sBhtztWk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U85q-qKJFDY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSXKdxdPRO8

---

---

Posts: 1254 | From: howdy | Registered: Mar 2014  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marija:
"Liberal" media? The media is overwhelmingly corporate. Corporate does NOT equal liberal.

Libyan "Arabs" treat the Amazigh population badly also.

The Western Press likely avoids this topic because they feel that it indicts the intervention of USA and France which helped the rebels oust Kaddafi. They want to pretend that their actions did not create such a mess as this.

As in Iraq, the West removed a bad leader, but then had no idea how to promote or achieve a good result, and so both countries are now hellholes.

As for the slavery in Libya, it's been going on for a very long time. I think the answer to why Africans would risk traversing such a country is that they are extremely desperate to improve themselves economically.

---

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
[QUOTE]Most of the modern foreign people in Libya are actual of Turkish descent or Arabized-Turks.

---

Posts: 139 | From: Piedmont, Virginia | Registered: Jan 2020  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marija:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ish Gebor:
[QUOTE]Most of the modern foreign people in Libya are actual of Turkish descent or Arabized-Turks.

---

You're forgetting the natives, who are Amazighen (Berber). Most of the people in Libya (or Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco) who call themselves "Arab" are in fact mostly of Amazigh ancestry. Following the Arab conquest of the Maghreb, the Amazigh culture, language and identity was vehemently suppressed, so that many adopted "Arab" identity simply to survive economically.

The numbers of actual Arabs or Turks who entered those countries was quite small.

Today there is an Amazigh revitalization movement occurring, mostly centered in France due to the danger of engaging in such activity in the Maghreb with Arab suppression of the Amazigh still at high levels.

Those countries in reality are no more "Arab" than Mexico and Peru are "Spanish".

---

quote:

---

Further, Turkey can boast a large community of “Koroglu” (Libyans of Turkish descent), some 1.4 million people residing mainly in Misrata, the “city-state” located approximately 180 kilometers east of Tripoli: in practice at least one out of every four Libyans is of Turkish origins.

---

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by SMirk92:
White Liberals want Blacks to look at only Whites as enemies because that will keep them looking for Non-Whites and guilt ridden Whites as Allies. It's a mouse trap.

---

Posts: 42935 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by SMirk92:
White Guilt is more Racist than White Pride. Racial Pride is Human Nature. Having White Pride doesn't harm Blacks. Having White Guilt makes race relations worse because it suggests that Whites are responsible for the condition of Blacks. White Guilt reinforces White Supremacy because people with White Guilt tend to see Black People as inferior helpless beings which is the source of their guilt complex. White Guilt is not sincere or humanitarian but patronizing.

---

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by SMirk92:
White Guilt is more Racist than White Pride. Racial Pride is Human Nature. Having White Pride doesn't harm Blacks.

---

quote:

---

Having White Guilt makes race relations worse because it suggests that Whites are responsible for the condition of Blacks.

---

Guys, don't look now, but I think we have a troll on our hands. I don't know many black people who talk like this. I do on the other hand know a lot of (racist) white conservatives that do. It'd certainly explain the trollish obsession he has with "Nubt" in all these threads. Wants to tear down ES by trolling but couldn't halp hisself to engage in conversation that triggers the white supremaci-- er oh I'm sorry "conservatives" on racial issues.

So you call it "white guilt" whenever white people are real enough to acknowledge that the past and present legacy of white supremacy and systemic racism has greatly contributed to the black condition? So slavery, redlining, Jim Crow, Apartheid and all of that is just "white guilt" with no historical fact nor impact on wealth? White supremacist lawmakers didn't attempt to structure policy so that blacks were harmed more than whites?

quote:

---

White Guilt reinforces White Supremacy because people with White Guilt tend to see Black People as inferior helpless beings which is the source of their guilt complex. White Guilt is not sincere or humanitarian but patronizing.

---

Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by SMirk92:
White Guilt is for Weak insecure outcasts. I once suffered from it and it was the biggest mistake of my life. I will never stoop to such lows again.

---

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ish Gebor:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SMirk92:
White Guilt is for Weak insecure outcasts. I once suffered from it and it was the biggest mistake of my life. I will never stoop to such lows again.

---

In my humble opinion. Ase propposed a relvant question.

Do you feel it was a good thing what socioeconomically was done to Black Americans? Guilt would mean that you personally are responsible, but nobody is stating that. The issue that is being addressed here is, do you feel it was and is justified how Black Americans have been mistreated by "whites" in support of the government.

All "white pride" has done was harm other groups. In fact the precursor of "white pride" is harming others as much as possible.

The abolitionists were liberals of their days.

---

Posts: 371 | From: Queens,NY | Registered: Feb 2020  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                         

quote:

---

You do not know the nature of the land in which you dwell.
Understand my anger.

Killing me was the sweet release they yearned for.

We are victims chained to their charity.

They are deeply sorry for the primal disdain they carry for us.

You are not unlucky.
You are unloved.
Walk with my burden.
When you share it with the world, I will release you.
Now go.

---

Posts: 8179 | From: the Tekrur straddling Senegal & Mauritania | Registered: Dec 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by SMirk92:

White guilt creates a parent/child relationship between Blacks and Whites and rests the progress of Blacks on the shoulders of sympathetic Whites.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SMirk92:
The White Conservative may look down on you but he’d prefer you to build a nation of your own.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SMirk92:
The White Liberal doesn’t want you to build anything on your own but depend on him.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SMirk92:
I will not spend the rest of my life trying to appease to Blacks. Blacks are Humans just like everybody else and have the divine innate capability to build a society of their own and do not need the sympathy or benevolence of White Liberals to accomplish this.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SMirk92:
Do you now see how Racist White Guilt is?. It is White Supremacy to suggest that Blacks need the sympathy of Whites in order to succeed.

---

quote:

---

White Guilt is not about improving race relations but rather about improving the moral compass of Whites.

---

Posts: 2508 | From: . | Registered: Nov 2011  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by SMirk92:
Though I’m leaving this forum. I will respond to you and after this I’ll be gone. I’ve never once stated that there was any justification for the treatment of African-Americans. I simply said that I do not support White Guilt Which is a nonsensical belief because it by its very nature is patronizing and does not improve The Black/White racial dynamic. White Guilt is not about improving race relations but rather about improving the moral compass of Whites. White guilt is self-serving and a Zillion times more harmful than White pride because it creates this notion that Whites are responsible for the welfare and condition of Blacks. White guilt creates a parent/child relationship between Blacks and Whites and rests the progress of Blacks on the shoulders of sympathetic Whites. The White Conservative may look down on you but he’d prefer you to build a nation of your own. The White Liberal doesn’t want you to build anything on your own but depend on him. This is why I made the statement that White Guilt is more harmful than White Pride. From my experience most racially aware Blacks do not like White Liberals and do not respect White Guilt so what is the point?. Why should I support Liberal views when racially aware Blacks see me as no different than Racist Whites?. You can say that my exposure to racially aware Blacks is what drained the White Guilt out of me. I understand that most Blacks are not racially aware but trust me enough are. I will not spend the rest of my life trying to appease to Blacks. Blacks are Humans just like everybody else and have the divine innate capability to build a society of their own and do not need the sympathy or benevolence of White Liberals to accomplish this. Do you now see how Racist White Guilt is?. It is White Supremacy to suggest that Blacks need the sympathy of Whites in order to succeed. The White Liberal who thinks Blacks need his sympathy is a Zillion times more Racist than any KKK member could ever dream of being. Anybody who believes Black progress requires something from White People is a White Supremacist by default.

---

quote:

---

White Americans’ Hold on Wealth Is Old, Deep, and Nearly Unshakeable

White families quickly recuperated financial losses after the Civil War, and then created a Jim Crow credit system to bring more white families into money.

It will end up costing the U.S. economy as much as $1 trillion between now and 2028 for the nation to maintain its longstanding black-white racial wealth gap, according to a report released this month from the global consultancy firm McKinsey & Company. That will be roughly 4 percent of the United States GDP in 2028—just the conservative view, assuming that the wealth growth rates of African Americans will outpace white wealth growth at its current clip of 3 percent to .8 percent annually, said McKinsey. If the gap widens, however, with white wealth growing at a faster rate than black wealth instead, it could end up costing the U.S. $1.5 trillion or 6 percent of GDP according to the firm.


“Despite the progress black families have made in civic and economic life since the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, they face systemic and cumulative barriers on the road to wealth building due to discrimination, poverty, and a shortage of social connections,” reads the report, “as both mechanisms and results of racial economic inequity.”

Crucial to understanding how to close that gap—such that it can actually be closed—is grappling with how it was created in the first place. The McKinsey report identifies four components that perpetuate this gap—family wealth, family income, family savings, and community context (a community’s collective public and private assets). Black families have not been able to build wealth due to “unmet needs and obstacles” across these four dimensions.





That’s the deficit-lens on the problem as it pertains to black families. But it’s worth looking at how each of those components also played a huge role in boosting white families’ financial standing to begin with. The wealth, income, and savings that white families accumulated during slavery supplied the economic thew that catapulted them into elite affluent status during the country’s first two centuries of existence. But it was community context and creative credit machinations that helped white families maintain that status over the ensuing two centuries, putting into doubt whether a closure of the black-white racial wealth gap is even possible given these deeply entrenched advantages.

Community context and connections

A study on the transfer of wealth from Southern slaveholding families to their children helps explain how these advantages came about. Strikingly, the inheritance of actual material profits from the slavery-based economy isn’t the culprit some suppose. The economists Leah Platt Boustan of Princeton University; Katherine Eriksson of the University of California, Davis; and Philipp Ager of the University of Southern Denmark found in their study, “The Intergenerational Effects of a Large Wealth Shock: White Southerners After the Civil War,” that white resilience to economic catastrophe has been almost impenetrable.

According to the study, the largest slaveholding families in the South took a huge hit after the Civil War—a 38 percent drop at the median and a 75 percent loss among the top wealthiest families between 1860, a peak year for slavery profits, and 1870. But by 1880, many of the sons of those families had already recovered that wealth. By 1900, the sons of the richest slaveholders had not only financially recovered but were wealthier than the sons of families who were just as wealthy before the Civil War, but from mostly non-slaveholding assets and activities.

It took just one generation for white slaveholding families to regain their riches, and this rebound was not due to an inheritance of slavery profits. Much of that was devoured by the war, emancipation, and regressive crop productivity in the South after the war. Nor was the recovery owed to an inheritance of entrepreneurial skills, which the study ruled out because of the drastic transition of the economy from agricultural-based to industrial-based.

“Even destroying the capital stock or temporarily expropriating the land of wealthy households would not have been enough to prevent their sons from experiencing full recovery.”

The Southern dollar rally might have had something to do with those slaveholders’ sons marrying into wealthier families. But most of the wealth recovered by slaveholders’ children came from occupation-based earnings. The most likely explanation for the restoration of their wealth, according to the study, is the “role of social networks in facilitating employment opportunities and access to credit”—or, in other words, community context. The wealthy slaveholding families were cozy enough with the wealthy families who weren’t totally in the slavery business to leverage their relationships into preservation of their elite status.

“We think the most likely explanation for the rapid recovery of slaveholders’ sons is that slaveholding families were embedded in social networks that facilitated adjustments to wartime losses,” reads the study. One critical adjustment facilitated in this respect was credit, which was “surprising in light of the fact that slave collateral formed the basis for nearly all southern credit relations and was completely wiped out after emancipation.”

Also wiped out were, in some cases, the land and plantations themselves, which were the final major appreciable assets that some former slaveholding families possessed after the war. The study examines General William T. Sherman’s “March to the Sea” and his “Special Field Order No. 15,” which directed Union troops to destroy and confiscate Confederate family homes, businesses, and properties along the Carolina and Georgia coasts. The households targeted and toppled by Sherman’s troops lost considerable wealth, on top of losing their slaveholding assets. But by 1880, those same ransacked families had financially recuperated. By that year, their wealth had even surpassed that of the wealthy families of neighboring counties that Sherman did not invade.

“Results suggest that even destroying the capital stock or temporarily expropriating the land of wealthy households would not have been enough to prevent their sons from experiencing full recovery in a generation,” reads the study.

Those coastal families achieved recovery through the same means that other white former-slaveholding families achieved it throughout the South: via their connections to those commandeering capital and finance in the post-Civil War milieu. Slaveholding families’ pre-war material resources and wealth did “not ultimately affect” their children’s future comeuppance, and neither did these advantages stop with their sons. By 1940, even the grandsons of former slaveholders were doing better than similarly situated non-slaveholding families, by graduating from high school and college— fairly uncommon in the South at the time—and settling securely into white-collar jobs.

“Jim Crow Credit”

The 1940s were also the period when white families were able to further enhance their wealth prospects through new credit and finance instruments created as part of the New Deal. At this point, white families and farm owners were taking advantage of loans created by what was then called the Federal Housing Administration and the Farm Security Administration to leverage their way into wealth. Whereas before the Civil War, mortgages and credit were collateralized on the backs of enslaved Africans as properties, by 1940 white families could obtain mortgages and credit collateralized by land, houses, and farms. And they didn’t have to come from wealthy families or be wealthy themselves to obtain this financing.

African American farmers and families, meanwhile, were unable to establish the wealth that former slaveholding families were re-establishing, nor were they able to access the FHA and FSA loans at the same rates as whites. The Atlantic’s Vann Newkirk describes in his story “The Great Land Robbery” how black farmers lost their land and farms during this time period:

While most of the black land loss appears on its face to have been through legal mechanisms—“the tax sale; the partition sale; and the foreclosure”—it mainly stemmed from illegal pressures, including discrimination in federal and state programs, swindles by lawyers and speculators, unlawful denials of private loans, and even outright acts of violence or intimidation. Discriminatory loan servicing and loan denial by white-controlled [Farmers Home Administration] and [Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service] committees forced black farmers into foreclosure, after which their property could be purchased by wealthy landowners, almost all of whom were white.

[...]

---

quote:

---

Six facts about wealth in the United States

On Wednesday night, the first of the 2020 Democratic debates will take place with ten candidates vying for the national spotlight. Senator Elizabeth Warren, one of the leading contenders for the nomination, will take the stage. She has proposed a wealth tax on the richest Americans, sparking intense debate about wealth inequality in the United States. Her proposal would levy a two percent tax on household net worth above $50 million and a three percent tax on household net worth above $1 billion.

As the Democratic candidates debate how to best address economic inequality, here are six things to know about wealth in the United States….

---

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged | 

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ase:
The White Liberals know Blacks ALREADY built the United States of America. That's where the GUILT you just spoke of came from! See the mental gymnastics racists play? If White Liberals didn't know Blacks built anything, they wouldn't be feeling guilty of anything. White Liberals can definitely be racists. But as a collective, they if nothing else acknowledge that what they're doing isn't rational-- That they enjoy the benefits of a country Blacks built. That Blacks didn't get the benefits associated with their hard work. YOU on the other hand won't even do that, and it's highly evident in the way you write.

---

Posts: 22235 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010  |  IP: Logged |