[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Not even close to the same.[/quote]
Not the same as what? Not the same as slavery? So it wasn’t slavery then?[/quote]
Yes, they were both slavery; but to imply that there was no difference between the two would indeed be intellectually dishonest. Equating the two would be like comparing a P-51 Mustang to a B-17. Do you think all slavery in the history of man was the same? I’m aware of the differences, but I’m not so sure that you are.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
I don’t think the book is suggesting that “the white man is the root of this despicable activity”, not at all. What he was suggesting was that white christians believed in the superiority of their race, and that they believed both science AND their religion gave them this belief.[/quote]
Really? White Christians believed that did they? Most ‘white Christians’ in the era we’re talking about couldn’t read and write, wouldn’t have known what ‘science’ was and many were enslaved to non-white masters - e.g. the Russian slaves of the Khanate of Khiva.
BTW - The term ‘Aryan’ in the nineteenth century referred to people who speak Indo-European languages and had none of the connotations that the Nazis later gave it.[/quote]
I’m not speaking to the common man, but to the intellectual and political leadership in the western world at the time. The common peoples you speak of looked to this leadership and wouldn’t have been able to really question them, nor would they have had any real desire to do so.
“Aryan” refers to peoples originating from the Caucasus mountains, currently in South Russia, just north of Iran. In fact, that region was a part of Iran, for its history, until the mid 1800’s. Also, this is where the term “Caucasian” comes from, unless I’m mistaken. (Bradley makes a point in his book that the term “Iran” derives from the the word “Aryan”)
This is all part of an unproven theory, more like a story I think, of an Aryan migration from this corner of the world to various other corners of the world, including (westward) to the forests of Germany. According to the story, these Aryans maintained the “purity of their blood” by killing the peoples they encountered instead of mating with and integrating with.
Supposedly, the Aryan gave way to the Teutons, who continued to migrate from the forests of Germany. Teutons had made their way to the British Isles continued to put a premium on their racial purity by killing and conquering the native peoples without integrating. These Teutons became known “Anglo-Saxons”. It’s believed by folks who put allot of stock in racially deterministic theories, that if they’d integrated, the great western flow of civilization would’ve been lost. Teddy Roosevelt himself had said “The world would’ve halted had it not been for the Teutonic conquests in alien lands”.
The above isn’t just some wacky story that wandered through history, it was fully believed in by the intellectual elite in the western world, and actively taught by the universities. Racially deterministic theories, unfortunately, were apparently all the rage for quite a while in the history of the western world.
You should really just go ahead and read the book.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
They believed that it was their divine moral right to establish their dominion, by force if necessary.[/quote]
They? “White” Christians? Is that what Irish peasants at the time thought? What about “white” Christians in the Balkans for example? Is that what they thought? Can we define the term “white” please?[/quote]
Perhaps “Caucasian” is an easier term for you to digest?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Whether or not they believed in slavery, as there certainly was plenty of white christians at the time who did not support slavery, but they most certainly did believe that they were the superior race, and that in order to achieve “peace and civility in society”, the white christian must establish their dominion. [/quote]
See above. Who are the ‘white Christians’ you are talking about.[/quote]
What is being discussed is the teachings and beliefs of both the intellectual and political universe of the day. Yes, we’re talking about Teddy Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, Secretary of State Robert Lansing, Peter Burnett, Lewis Morgan, Samuel Morton, Jedidah Morse, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Thomas Hart Benton, Bishop George Berkeley, Josiah C. Nott, Lewis Morgan, Francis Parkman, Nathaniel Southgate, John Burgess, and many others.
In his book, Bradley also states: “And while Lincoln had technically freed the slaves, by 1905 disenfranchisement and restrictive Jim Crow laws invisibly re shackled the American black man, and the local lynching tree had plenty of branches left.”
Do you really believe that the western world at that time wasn’t dominated by white christians with a full belief in their racial superiority? You can’t be that ignorant, right?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
That is a very aryan line of thought, and as the author points out, one that was being taught widespread in the universities of the day. [/quote]
It’s an Indo-European linguistic line of thought is it? Or do you mean in the Nazi sense? A very Nordic line of thought? Are there ‘very black lines of thought’ too?[/quote]
See above