Sunday, November 4, 2007

The words of an African king, 1792

The flip side of black nationalists’ demonization of white people is their romantic idealization of the African past. Lift up your head, black man. You are descended from Kings and Queens!

Reality is a lot more complicated.

I came upon a fascinating speech by Adanzu II, King of Dahomey, which was printed in an American magazine in 1792. (Dahomey is now the West African nation of Benin.) The speech was reprinted in Carter G. Woodson’s Journal of Negro History in 1916.

Adanzu was most definitely running shit. (Dahomey wouldn’t be colonized by the French until a century later.) This king, like other Dahoman kings, maintained power and wealth by going to war with neighboring tribes, then selling some of the captives to European slave traders.

Those captives were the lucky ones.

Others were killed by the hundreds as human sacrifices in royal voodoo ceremonies known as the “customs.”

The throne of the Dahoman kings (now in a museum in Benin) is mounted on four human skulls.

In the 1792 speech, Adanzu was evidently addressing visitors from England. So here, from the pages of the Journal of Negro History, is the “Remarkable Speech of Adahoonzou, King of Dahomey, an Interior Nation of Africa, On Hearing What Was Passing in England Respecting the Slave Trade”:
ADANZU II: I admire the reasoning of the white men; but with all their sense, it does not appear that they have thoroughly studied the nature of the blacks, whose disposition differs as much from that of the whites, as their colour.

The same great Being formed both; and since it hath seemed convenient for him to distinguish mankind by opposite complexions, it is a fair conclusion to presume that there may be as great a disagreement in the qualitie of their minds; there is likewise a remarkable difference between the countries which we inhabit.

You, Englishmen, for instance, as I have been informed, are surrounded by the ocean, and by this situation seem intended to hold communication with the whole world, which you do, by means of your ships; whilst we Dahomans, being... hemmed in amidst a variety of other people, of the same complexion, but speaking different languages, are obliged by the sharpness of our swords, to defend ourselves from their incursions, and punish the depredations they make on us.

Such conduct in them is productive of incessant wars. Your countrymen, therefore, who alledge that we go to war for the purpose of supplying your ships with slaves, are grossly mistaken. ...

In the name of my ancestors and myself, I aver, that no Dahoman ever embarked in war merely for the sake of procuring wherewithal to purchase your commodities.

I, who have not been long master of this country, have without thinking of the market, killed many thousands, and I shall kill many thousands more. When policy or justice requires that men be put to death, neither silk, nor coral, nor brandy, nor cowries, can be accepted as substitutes for the blood that ought to be spilt for example sake[.]

[B]esides if white men chuse to remain at home, and no longer visit this country for the same purpose that has usually brought them thither, will black men cease to make war? I answer, by no means, and if there be no ships to receive their captives, what will become of them?

I answer, for you, they will be put to death. ... Did not you see me make custom – annual ceremony – for Weebaigah, the third king of Dahomey? And did you not observe on the day such ceremony was performing, that I carried a bow in my hand, and a quiver filled with arrows on my back?

These were the emblems of the times; when, with such weapons, that brave ancestor fought and conquered all his neighbors. ...

Did Weebaigah sell slaves? No; his prisoners were all killed to a man. What else could he have done with them? Was he to let them remain in this country to cut the throats of his subjects?

This would have been wretched policy indeed; which, had it been adopted, the Dahoman name would have long ago been extinguished, instead of becoming as it is at this day, the terror of surrounding nations. ...

You have seen me kill many men at the customs; and you have often observed delinquents at Grigwhee and others of my provinces tied, and sent up to me. I kill them, but do I ever insist on being paid for them?

Some heads I order to be placed at my door, others to be strewed about the market place, that the people may stumble upon them, when they little expect such a sight. This gives a grandeur to my customs, far beyond the display of fine things which I buy; this makes my enemies fear me....

Besides, if I neglect this indispensable duty, would my ancestors suffer me to live? Would they not trouble me day and night, and say that I sent no body to serve them? That I was only solicitous about my own name, and forgetful of my ancestors?

White men are not acquainted with these circumstances; but I now tell you that you may hear and know, and inform your countrymen, why customs are made, and will be made, as long as black men continue to possess their country[.]

[T]he few that can be spared from this necessary celebration, we sell to the white men; and happy, no doubt, are such, when they find themselves... to be disposed of to the Europeans. “We shall still drink water,” say they to themselves; “white men will not kill us. ...”

33 comments:

Invisible Woman said...

Wow.

Marcus said...

Nothing surprising or enlightening here in this post, so I must ask, forgive my ignorance, what is your point?

Undercover Black Man said...

^ My point is that an ideology built upon the presumption that white people (or white "systems") are to blame for black people's problems -- an ideology such as black nationalism -- is simple-minded.

This particular African king chopped off the heads of other Africans by the hundreds for reasons having nothing to do with white people, but as a ritual of ancestor worship and as a tactic of political terror.

Matter fact, when the French did get around to colonizing West Africa, other black tribes helped them to conquer to Dahomey... because they figured white rulers at least wouldn't be chopping off heads.

Marcus said...

I don't know if this settles it, I mean really people kill other people all the time so saying that this speach is definitive proof against the notion that white people are to blame for the problems of non-whites is also simple-minded.

I believe there is evidence on both sides of the so called global system of white supremacy debate.

The real question is what's the point of debating it?
If it's proven true that there is a GS/WS what are non-whites going to do about it?
If it isn't true what's that going to change?

Something like this you can't prove or disprove.

Edshugeo The GodMoor said...

Awesome speech, in a Conan The Barbarian way. Did the visitors from England stay over night, or did they have other matters that needed attending to "right away"?

Undercover Black Man said...

Marcus, what about this thought experiment:

Accepting for the sake of argument that a GSWS exists... it's still debatable whether black people should devote themselves to dismantling it.

Why? Because what would the world look like without that system -- the system presumed to have ordered the world for the past 500 years -- in place to make things run?

How can you or Fisher or Craig Nulan assume that some other system would be better for black people?

The ridiculous thing about Fisher's prattling throughout the weekend debate was... he argued that we should devote ourselves to dismantling this all-pervasive "supremacy system" without bothering to explain why this would lead to a better life for black people!

I think this needs to be explained by someone. What would the Black-Nationalist Fantasy Planet look like??

In other words, to dismantle every element of the GSWS would mean... what? Abolishing the New York Stock Exchange? Throwing the U.S. Constitution in the garbage?

Shutting down Yale and Harvard and every college founded by illegitimately privileged whites? Invalidating every national border drawn by the old racist colonial powers?

Then what? Replace it all with what? A return to the glory days of black kingdoms like Dahomey?

Black racialists waste so much damn time fantasizing about pure bullshit. Meanwhile, black people prosper in America like nowhere else on Earth. And will do so more and more as time goes by.

Undercover Black Man said...

Awesome speech, in a Conan The Barbarian way.

Hee-hee... Yeah, Edshugeo, my mind flashed to another kind of movie... with the Italian Mob instead of the English, and a Nicky Barnes in place of Adanzu II.

memomachine said...

Hmmmmm.

1. A very pragmatic king.

2. I've read somewhere that the best advice for kings is to never stint on death warrants.

And, generally speaking, it is good advice as kings are often overthrown when they stop killing their enemies.

Exodus Mentality said...

How about starting with this proposition? The straw man arguments you present are designs of your own mind and should not be attributed wholesale to any of us you lump together under your label of "black nationalist" or who are proponents and students of the theory of a global system of white supremacy. Your Black nationalist fantasy planet does not exist anywhere but in your own mind, and there you have already dismissed it as impossible or totally unworkable. Your fantasy construct doesn't work for you and you want to blame my theory for that. That's simple minded. In point of fact, dismantling many of the institutions that perpetuate white supremacy including white hegemony of educational and economic pursuits would most likely be an integral part of dismantling the system. But since you patently don't understand the sytem, exactly how this would work to our advantage will continue to elude you.

You simply can't continue to believe that because you present an example that proports to fall outside of the pardigm of white supremacy, you have therefore disproven or discredited the theory in its entireity. A Black man killed someone and you can't tie that activity directly back to white supremacist control, therefore there is no functional white supremacy. That is simple minded. I guess you can follow that theory to it's logical extension, that because you can't see it, it can't possibly exist. Do you feel the same way about the sun every day it sinks below the horizon? Does it cease to exist for you when it is no longer evident to your least heightened senses?

Here's an alternative theory. The GSWS was in it's formative stages around the time of this particular African king, and yet if you choose to look at events in their proper perspective, you can see how the white collective is even then operating to establish their desired relationship with non-white people. They are purchasing African slaves. Are Africans making special trips during this time period to purchase white slaves? Does the speech by the African king attempt to describe or denote some sort of innate skin color based supremacy of his people over any other people, or does he specifically infer a difference, nothing more, nothing less? These are the types of clues we use to identify and define the parameters of the GSWS. It's so much more than what any one person, Black or White, says or does on the surface. It is reflected the underlying thoughts, perspectives, and motivations for those actions.

Undercover Black Man said...

Exodus Mentality, welcome here and thank you for commenting.

Obviously, I need some things explained to me. And I would very much appreciate any time you can devoted to that.

You wrote: "... dismantling many of the institutions that perpetuate white supremacy including white hegemony of educational and economic pursuits would most likely be an integral part of dismantling the system."

Then what? What system replaces the GSWS? How would the world work differently under the new system? Can you give me a sense of the new world order you envision?

For instance, is there such a thing as private property? Will there be stock exchanges?

Will current national borders be redrawn?

Will the U.S. Constitution be invalidated?

In other words: Shouldn't you provide thinking people with some notion of how a post-GSWS world might look and function... so we can ponder whether such a world would be better for black people than the world we're now living in?

Exodus Mentality said...

Greetings, back at you ubm, and forgive me for not offering you salutations on my first arriving.

In response to your request for clarification, I must saythat I do not have all the answers. I really wish I did. I could give you a brief glimpse of my personal view of utopia, but I am just smart enough to realize that it is actually o.k. for me not to have all the answers. My personal opinion on your wuestions about ownership and commerce is that it should resemble something we haven't tried before, like Technocracy, rather than simply hanging on to antiquated systems based on the mentality of Feudal European society. But that's just me. There may be people with better ideas that I am not even aware of.

What I do know is that currently, the vast majority of the world's people are classified as non-white, by a distinct minority of the world's people who classify themselves as white; and I know that all observable phenomena show that that white minority operates within a power framework that has allowed it to exercise control over the non-white populations in all areas of human experience. I know all of this and I am sure that this cannot be allowed to continue.

And yet that still won't answer your question. (Not that there isn't an answer for your queston, although I make no claims to knowing that answer). The question in and of itself doesn't want an answer. You want the lack of an answer to your queston to be a proof about something only vaguely related to your question.

"Shouldn't you provide thinking people with some notion of how a post-GSWS world might look and function"

I shouldn't have to. Thinking people who recognize the pervasive and pernicious nature of the GSWS recognize that anything would be better than this headlong rush to Armaggedon. It's not enough for you to simply accept the proposition of some nebulous thing called white supremacy, and then ask so flippantly, what do I have that's better than what we've already got? There were slaves who said the same thing, most often slaves who had managed to eke out a little bit more comfort than most other slaves, the relative elite. They would say "where can we go that things will be better? We should be happy with what we have right here under massa's hand, heavy though it might be for some of us. Work harder and things will get better right here." That may be fine for you, but it falls well short of a workable worldview for me. And you should be honest about it to yourself and others. Don't rain on my worldview because it offers me something you don't feel is even attainable. Even if I can't imagine what the world would be like if I wasn't a slave, that doesn't mean that I am going to be content with slavery.

It's fine if you don't want to acknowledge a concept as broad as the GSWS without applying constant tests and challenging every supposition. I do that myself, and I've yet to find a situation of circumstance that rendered the concept of GSWS irrational or untenable. Your challenges to the concept are simply not valid on their face.

Anonymous said...

Exodus Mentality and UBM;
Excellent discussion!

Now, a question about this GSWS;

What about Asia? More than half the world's population hails from Asia.

How might a Chinese or Japanese world view affect the African?

eeaster said...

I'd have to agree with Marcus a bit. Not sure this made your point, which is not to say I diagree with your point, really. Given the times, I'm not quite sure which leader of any country in the world in that century would be saying anything dramatically different.

Not sure the US govt. feels any differently in 2007 except that it's against the law.

Undercover Black Man said...

Exodus Mentality, thanks for that.

Believe me, I'm not being flippant in asking "What's better than the system we got?" In terms of the resolution as stated for last weekend's debate, I think it is a key question, if we're going to talk about what the "U.S. black elite" is duty-bound to do.

Let me present this associated idea:

Would you stipulate that some manifestations of the GSWS are more benign/less malignant than others?

Perhaps you wouldn't. But I think it's self-evident that U.S. chattel slavery was more benign than Brazilian chattel slavery. Because in Brazil the average life span of an African slave post-capture was 7 years, which meant that fresh bodies had to be constantly thrown into that plantation economy, like coals being shoveled into a furnace. Whereas in the U.S. a population of long-lived, self-propogating black slaves was the goal.

I think it's also self-evident that Jim Crow racism was more benign than slavery, because under Jim Crow racism black people weren't classified as property.

I think it's also self-evident that the American system of today is more benign than Jim Crow racism, because today black people are not discriminated against as a matter of law.

Am I wrong to say these things are self-evident? Or do you think Brazilian slavery, U.S. slavery, Jim Crow and today's America were all equally bad?

If they're not equally bad, then it's possible to make the effects of GSWS less malignant/more benign.

Given that you don't feel the need to articulate an alternative world order... perhaps it would make more sense for the black elite to devote itself not to dismantling the current power structure, but to continuing to make its effects more benign for black people.

Speaking just in terms of a logical argument, of course.

th said...

exodus mentality asked: Are Africans making special trips during this time period [circa 1792] to purchase white slaves?

No, because Europeans weren't willing to sell. However, Africans were making raids in Europe, and taking white slaves gratis. From the 16th to 19th century more than a million Europeans were captured and sold to slavery by the Barbary pirates who hailed from Maghreb in North Africa. more

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ exodus mentality

In point of fact, dismantling many of the institutions that perpetuate white supremacy including white hegemony of educational and economic pursuits would most likely be an integral part of dismantling the system.

If you really believe in this stuff then please explain the success of Asians vs blacks under the aegis of this supposed "white supremacy".

That's something of a serious logical hole in your argument.

In point of fact the very people who ascribe to Black Nationalism, i.e. liberals, subvert the educational system against whites and Asians in order to aid blacks under the canopy of "diversity".

So how is the whole white domination thing to work when the very people in charge of this white domination are discriminating against whites in your favor?

Anonymous said...

Hi I enjoyed reading that speech and the discussion afterwards was very enlightening. I too am not quite sold on this GSWS theory, but Exodus Mentality made a strong point...
I don't think there's a secret society of white supremacist that keep things working in their favor, but I do think that people of European orgin have created a system that works in their favor.
One thing that's always stuck out to me is the concept of white and non-white. The exclusivity of their group speaks to a mentality of supremacy to me. Equally, the "one drop" rule: anyone can be black, but you have to be *something* (supreme?) to be white.
The millions of Africans and African Americans that are poor and dying show that this system is not working for us and something needs to change.
Thanks for your great blog.

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ th

No, because Europeans weren't willing to sell.

Actually that's not necessarily true.

There are various accounts of European feudal lords secretly selling their serfs into slavery to Arabs, Berbers and other groups in the Middle East and North Africa.

But otherwise you're absolutely correct. There are numerous accounts of villages in Cornwall which were regularly attacked by pirates and slavers.

...

To be frankly honest the existence of former slavery as a central tenant of modern American black culture is kinda strange to me. The fact is that pretty much every single group of humans have been slaves and slave owners at one point in history. And in point of fact many Asian groups have been slaves for far longer, more times and more recently than any group of American blacks.

My own specific race, Koreans, as a point of fact were regularly enslaved by the Chinese and Japanese over the past 5,000 years or so. Consider the actions of the Japanese military biological research group Unit 731 circa WWII. Nobody knows precisely how many Chinese civilians were slaughtered by this group but the estimates are around 50,000+.

Consider also the Russian serfs during the Russian feudal era. The life of a Russian serf was so incredibly brutal that they actually devised a special "famine bread".

HistoryHouse

*shrug* much of history is nothing but rape, robbery and murder sanctified by some authority or another as righteous.

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ anonymous

The exclusivity of their group speaks to a mentality of supremacy to me. Equally, the "one drop" rule: anyone can be black, but you have to be *something* (supreme?) to be white.

???

I grew up in the absolute whitest of white America, New Hampshire, and I have never, ever, heard any white person describe another as "oh yeah, he's white".

Seriously.

TH said...

Actually that's not necessarily true.

There are various accounts of European feudal lords secretly selling their serfs into slavery to Arabs, Berbers and other groups in the Middle East and North Africa.


True, but I don't think it was still happening in late 18th century, at least not in Western Europe. In earlier times it was not unusual. For example, in the Middle Ages, the Varangians (Scandinavian rulers of Russia) sold Russians and other Slavs as slaves to Arabs.

The "one drop rule" has really ever only been in used in the USA, and most white people don't live there.

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ th

True, but I don't think it was still happening in late 18th century, at least not in Western Europe. In earlier times it was not unusual. For example, in the Middle Ages, the Varangians (Scandinavian rulers of Russia) sold Russians and other Slavs as slaves to Arabs.

Good point.

The "one drop rule" has really ever only been in used in the USA, and most white people don't live there.

What an odd thing.

Undercover Black Man said...

The "one drop rule" has really ever only been in used in the USA, and most white people don't live there.

What an odd thing.


I wonder if it's all about religiously rooted sexual repression?

Consider the history of South Africa. I don't know if they call it a "one-drop rule," but the Afrikaners were definitely hung up on racial admixture. Thus the creation of "coloured" as a separate classification for mixed-race people.

When I visited in 2000, somebody told me about the "pencil test." Y'all know about the "brown-bag test" in the U.S., right, my non-black friends? Well, the pencil test was, they put a pencil in a kid's hair, and if it falls to the ground, he's white. If the pencil stays, he's "coloured."

Now, what did the Afrikaners have in common with the English Puritans who colonized North America? Both of their religions -- Afrikaner Calvinism and Puritanism -- were offshoots of Calvinism, which is known for its repressive sexual mores.

Whereas lusty French, Spanish and Portuguese colonizers had no compunctions about banging anything that moved, and thus less reason to stigmatize mixed-race offspring, whether in Santo Domingo, Colombia, Brazil (or New Orleans).

marcus said...

Memomachine,

I think it is important to note that china and korea are countries (I know you know this) so comparing what happened there doesn't work when compared to American slavery.

Blacks didn't have their own country to go back to or kick someone out of (Liberia doesn't count).

There are many reasons why Asians have been successful in America, I think the most important one is the fact that Asians are not black. That Seems pretty ovbvious to me.

Plus white men love them some Asian women lol.

Exodus Mentality said...

@ UBM, What's better than the system we got? Something that will not make any attempt to consign my daughter to second class citizenship or less than human because of the color of her skin. Which is why I advocate nothing less than a complete and full reckoning of the GSWS. I do not dispute your logic as to the issue of varying degrees of the manifestations of the GSWS. You want to compare the slavery in Brazil to slavery in the U.S.; I say comparison is not necessary. What you fail to understand is that the GSWS has manifestations that appear genocidal, as evidenced by a form of slavery that intentionally killed off slaves, and it has other manifestations as well, that may seek to subjugate non-white people without completely eradicating them. That both of these motivations could exist in a Global System should not surprise you or unduly stretch the imagination.

I simply do not subscribe to a worldview that allows me to accept any version of the concept "lesser of two evils". So I would be very slow to accept a solution regarding the best course of action for the Black elite that does not require, at it's core, a complete and total acknowledgement of the problem and a commitment to completely dismantling all vestiges of the GSWS. I believe this is necessary to ever moving towards real solutions. I recognize that everything can't change at once, but I don't care for a mentality that can discount the existance of the problem simply because things are looking a little better, in some respects, than they used to.


"please explain the success of Asians vs blacks under the aegis of this supposed "white supremacy".
That's something of a serious logical hole in your argument."

My understanding of GSWS is that it has a remarkably measurable degree of effect, that correlates to darkness of skin color. Thus the darker the complexion, the more onerous the application and effect of white supremacy. The simple logic behind this operation of the system is that the system did not develop in a vacuum, rather it has grown and mutated in time with the course of human events. I find no logical disconnect whatsoever in the observable phenomena that people of Asian origin were never subjected to the levels of oppression that were visited on people of African descent throughout the world. I'm no student of history, but I am sure that the history of Asian people still shows a significant culture clash with white supremacy, with whites being in the position of greatest advantage. The economic power manifesting now in Asian countries is of great concern to the continued existance of WS and you may expect white global powers to continue to try to interdict Asian access to power, even to the point of military action.

As I said, I am not a student of history, and I aint gonna do the research to try to prove who did what when. Not my style. However, those of you who want to use your background in historical research should try this exercise. I would contend that a manifestation of the GSWS was the institutions of slavery that were created to support the GSWS. These institutions were singularly different from any other form of slavery in recorded history in that they applied a supremacist ideology and meticulously attempted to dehumanize the non-white slaves based on skin color. It's very true that slavery existed since the dawn of humanity, but doesn't it strike you as odd that the chattel slavery conditions that appeared during the apex of the GSWS never appeared at any other time? Prove me wrong historian.

@memo, If you identify yourself as white, then you must have some subconscious dividing point between yourself and those you identify as non-white. Call it the one drop rule, call it the mason dixon line, call it what you will, it's very existance is the core of the scourge of white supremacy that must be stamped out. This is the reason why a few Black success stories will never even begin to address the problem because they will always be "Black" success stories to those who identify themselves as white. The manifestations of the GSWS are all around you all the time, and just because you haven't encountered one specific phrase, don't fool yourself into thinking you haven't been exposed in many other ways. Don't think your limited personal experiences are the be all and end all of the workings of the system. Keep in mind that the system is the key. You may not see all the moving parts, but you most certainly see the parts that you come into contact with and you see the overall result of the functioning of the system

Undercover Black Man said...

^ I appreciate the clarity with which you express your position, Exodus.

It's worth my every effort to try to persuade you that the world is not so grim... and that the material and intellectual advancement of black people in America hasn't been petty, it has been the great human triumph of the past century.

Exodus Mentality said...

UBM I hope you realize that you and I are not really that different. You may be falling victim to the all too human failing of looking at my situation through your eyes. You think my understanding and acceptance of a theory of GSWS somehow diminishes me. You postulate that it actually makes me an unwitting accomplice in my own oppression. You say my worldview is unreasonably grim. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Neither is it true that I consider the accomplishments of my ancestors in the face of virulent aggressive murderous white supremacy to be in any shape form or fashion petty or insignificant. I teach my children all the time about the wonderous accomplishments and resilience of the ancestors. We show the ancestors nothing but respect. When I speak of the insufficiency of their efforts it's not to diminish the effort. It is to say that we are still fighting this battle, because the correct thrust has yet to be made. My child can correct me and if I am wrong and she is right, I certainly won't consider her disrespectful for pointing out my fallacy. All I'm saying is that even while we were working to better our situation, especially here in America, we neglected to place sufficient focus on the true problem of white supremacy, thus leaving it more or less intact. This rendered many of our "successes" more or less superficial. That doesn't take anything away from those who fought to achieve those successes. It simply raises a valid issue that some of the things we suspected would make our situation better, for example integration, actually have not had the desired effect. Not because the idea of integration is fundamentally flawed, but because the attempt at integration was undertaken without taking into account the underlying GSWS that remained unchallenged at it's core and thus simply modified to accomodate integration without relinquishing any real power or position.

This is not a grim reality but it is a reality. The advances we have made as a people make us even more capable of finally administering the death stroke to white supremacy once and for all. But that will never happen if we convince ourselves that the battle is somehow already won. And though I have been accused of being delusional, I maintain that the battle is still raging all around us. We are beset on all sides by the GSWS which is even more determined in it's efforts to fix this global hegemony into place permanently.

I think the only way we can lose is if we ignore the reality that's staring us straight in the face. I've heard it said that the greatest trick the devil ever pulled was getting people to believe he didn't exist. My outlook isn't grim. You should have known me before I began to really understand the system. I was very much a gloom and doomer, because I could see the signs all around, but I had no idea why things were the way they were or how they could possibly be changed. Now I actually have a worldview that allows me to feel hopeful that we can really overcome. But you will never solve a problem that you don't even acknowledge exists.

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ marcus

1. I think it is important to note that china and korea are countries (I know you know this) so comparing what happened there doesn't work when compared to American slavery.

They are countries but they are also distinct races.

But the question still remains. If the white power structure is so inimical to non-whites, then how do Asians succeed so well?

And if Asian's successes can be an indicator then it shows that there isn't in fact a white power structure.

2. Blacks didn't have their own country to go back to or kick someone out of (Liberia doesn't count).

*shrug* it isn't about kicking anybody out of any particular place. It's about oppression which doesn't require a geographical location.

3. There are many reasons why Asians have been successful in America, I think the most important one is the fact that Asians are not black. That Seems pretty ovbvious to me.

Except that Asians have had to deal with a great deal of oppression as have blacks. These things aren't well known here in the USA specifically because Asians haven't gone out and beat the drum about it. It happened, it was dealt with, it's not happening now, move on with life. That's pretty much the Asian way of things. IMO I think it's because historically Asian societies have been extremely brutal to civilian populations.

Consider the Chinese Exclusion Act. It was repealed until ***1945***! I.e. 80 years *after* the end of the Civil War that gave blacks their freedom. And there have been a multitude of other "Acts" passed in state law, particularly California, that eliminated or restricted Asian rights severely.

An example: A California law in the 1800's eliminated the right of any Asian to bear witness against a white person in a criminal trial. This unleashed a horrendous cascade of rape, robbery and murder all up and down California because Asians, specifically Chinese, could not bring up charges against anyone. Numerous Chinese women were kidnapped outright and forced into prostitution with zero recourse to the law.

But you don't read about that in school histories though eh?

4. Plus white men love them some Asian women lol.

That's because they're fools.

I grew up in a largely Korean household surrounded by Korean women. They are control freaks. Every Asian woman is a control freak.

Oh sure you'll get the nice treatment. She'll wait on you hand a foot at the beginning. But the relationship slowly changes until you're totally dependent on her. And they carry grudges till the day they die.

Example: When I was 8 years old, and I remember this clearly, my dad was working like 90+ hour weeks at his job trying to get things straightened out so we could move into a new house. But the lawn in front of our current house needed mowing. I didn't know how to use the mower, since nobody used those things in South Korea at that time, and neither did my (Korean) mother.

So she took a pair of scissors, a *ruler* and on her hands and knees cut the lawn with the pair of scissors and ruler until it was to her satisfaction.

And then when my exhausted father got home she gave him a taste of pure HELL.

Edshugeo The GodMoor said...

A lot of people don't realize that Asians (outside of the US) don't consider themselves a single race. This was true of Europeans up to a relatively short while ago. In some ways, it's still true.

mint_tea said...

I agree with UBM on this subject, but memomachine you have to stop equating Asian suffering with the Black American experience.

"Consider the Chinese Exclusion Act. It was repealed until ***1945***! I.e. 80 years *after* the end of the Civil War that gave blacks their freedom."

Um... no. Some of the worst racism crescendoed long AFTER the Civil War ended, with the Jim Crow laws and the lynchings and the reemergent KKK. Korea suffered, as all nations have suffered, but not like that. For most of its history, Korea was a proud, independent state or group of states.

Otherwise I agree with UBM. I find the extreme left to be shockingly obtuse and counterproductive, but like most people I shrug my shoulders and move on.

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ exodus mentality

1. My understanding of GSWS is that it has a remarkably measurable degree of effect, that correlates to darkness of skin color. Thus the darker the complexion, the more onerous the application and effect of white supremacy.

But that doesn't make sense when you take into account the actual history of the relationship between Western and Eastern people.

The very first example of the international drug trade was exemplified by the Opium Wars where the British fought the Chinese in order to force the Chinese to allow the importation of unlimited amounts of opium from India. The Chinese didn't want their entire population addicted to opium, the British wanted the profits from millions of opium addicted Chinese.

If there is amelioration of of the GSWS based on Asian's skin color then I've yet to see an example of that.

Consider the examples I've posted before where numerous college admissions practices *restrict* Asian participation in favor of other races. You could say that's an example of the GSWS impacting Asians. Except that the beneficiaries of these practices are blacks and latinos, which clearly shouldn't be a goal of any such GSWS.

Such explorations are interesting but without actual fact and examples to underpin them they are clearly of a speculative nature.


2. The economic power manifesting now in Asian countries is of great concern to the continued existance of WS and you may expect white global powers to continue to try to interdict Asian access to power, even to the point of military action.

I'm sorry but I have to point out that the entire reason why Asian countries are having such increases in economic power is because of deliberate investment by *whites*.

*shrug* look at Wal-Mart. I've read in some places that Wal-Mart, either directly or indirectly, employs a huge percentage of China's workforce.


3. @memo, If you identify yourself as white, then you must have some subconscious dividing point between yourself and those you identify as non-white.

Actually I was born in South Korea so I'm Asian, not white. But I grew up in the whitest part of America, New Hampshire. My very first memory of meeting a black person was shortly before my 18th birthday when I arrived at Parris Island Recruit Training Center for the USMC.

And then my very first black person ever seen was my drill instructor!

That was an interesting experience. :)

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ Edshugeo The GodMoor

A lot of people don't realize that Asians (outside of the US) don't consider themselves a single race. This was true of Europeans up to a relatively short while ago. In some ways, it's still true.

This is very very true. Frankly I don't think that many people in Europe consider themselves "European" rather than say "French". But there is something of a universal European identity.

There is not an "Asian" identity, even here in the USA. I use the term "Asian" as shorthand, but I don't consider myself "Asian" in any way, shape or form.

memomachine said...

Hmmmm.

@ mint_tea

1. I agree with UBM on this subject, but memomachine you have to stop equating Asian suffering with the Black American experience.

Why? There is practically nothing that happened to blacks, outside slavery, that didn't happen to Asians. And the slavery of Asians that did happen was largely isolated to Asian countries rather than here in the USA because it was cheaper to leave them in their native countries rather than importing them into the USA.

2. Um... no. Some of the worst racism crescendoed long AFTER the Civil War ended, with the Jim Crow laws and the lynchings and the reemergent KKK.

Same thing with Asians in the USA.

Chinese in California: Timeline

*shrug* the experiences of blacks in America isn't unique.

3. Korea suffered, as all nations have suffered, but not like that. For most of its history, Korea was a proud, independent state or group of states.

Completely and utterly wrong.

For most of Korea's existence it was a conquered province of either China or Japan with the subjugated population used as forced labor or forced prostitutes.

4. Otherwise I agree with UBM. I find the extreme left to be shockingly obtuse and counterproductive, but like most people I shrug my shoulders and move on.

Ultimately that's the best attitude. The past is the past and it cannot be changed. You can use the lessons of the past to prevent future occurrences but it's best not to dwell on the past.

Or, I think the phrase goes, if you live in the past, you cannot have a future. Or something like that.

marcus said...

Lets see Memo,

Asians (shorthand) had their own language, culture,hell they have their own names, have their own histories, families were kept intact, most chose to come to america.

Blacks could not have/keep their own language, could not keep their culture going (some aspects were kept though), took the names of their owners, history was lost, families were not kept together (there apparently were some exceptions), did not choose to come to america. Then after 300 years of slavery and another 100 years or so of jim crow finally were freed (again), which by the way was 50 years ago, lol my parents were born in the jim crow era.

So yeah the asian experience in america is comparable to the black experience.

I think the real saying as is practiced today is:

"Remember the past, well the good past that is, all that messy stuff let's just forget and move on, also when convenient lets pretend the past doesn't affect the future... you know what on second thought let's just move on, the past is the past."

Unfortunately humans are not wired to just forget the past and move on.

LOL.