[ScottGem]

Yes, the enslavement of africans by europeans and americans, was racist. It was racist because the enslavers believed that africans were an inferior race that should be treated as property, not people. But something a lot of people seem to forget is that slavery was widely practiced in Africa. Tribes often took slaves in raids on other tribes. Africans that were shipped as slaves to the Americas, were more often than not sold to the slavers by their fellow africans.

The history of mankind is full of instances of slavery. In fact, the first real idea that slavery was bad came from europeans. It wasn't until the 17th century that this idea started to grow. So slavery has been an accepted institution for a lot longer than it has been demeaned.

The word racist is a hot button word. In its pure sense, it means the belief tha one race of homo sapiens is superior to another. In that sense, the enslavement of africans was racist. But too often racist is used interchangeably with bigot (someone who is intolerant and feels hatred toward a specific race). The planatation owners, slave traders, of early american history were rarely bigots. They simply viewed their slaves as property not humans. Many slave owners, genuinely and accurately felt, they were improving the quality of life for their slaves.

[hamworld05]

That gives me an idea: Should we insult racists? Why shouldn't we make them feel bad for being racists? Maybe I'm just confused.

[ScottGem]

People shouldn't be insulted. Ideas, concepts and actions can be. For example, we shouldn't say MadMike was an ignorant pig. Instead we should say his ideas about race are demeaning and irrational.

[hamworld05]

People shouldn't be insulted. Ideas, concepts and actions can be. For example, we shouldn't say MadMike was an ignorant pig. Instead we should say his ideas about race are demeaning and irrational.

Oh! That makes sense.

[JakeDD]

Of course I know that slavery is wrong. This is a strictly an exercise in philosophical reasoning. It is easy to say the right things but it is far more important to understand why. So the question is; Why shouldn't I be able to own another human being?

Some people believe personal freedom is the most basic gift that comes with life. Slavery makes an exception for that, which should be opposed by people with that belief.

For someone with a completely open point of view, there should be absolutely nothing wrong with slavery. It could be unpopular in one period because of another perspective, but the bottom line is that it is impossible to PROVE that slavery is wrong.

[JakeDD]

That gives me an idea: Should we insult racists? Why shouldn't we make them feel bad for being racists? Maybe I'm just confused.

Racism and slavery are two completely different topics. We may accociate the two because of our memory of American history, but the real history of slavery is between the small and powerful.

Insulting racists just isn't a very effective method of spreading your point of view on others. Try teaching them with love and respect, because like freedom, every man and woman deserve it. We spread love with more love, not hatred.

[hamworld05]

Racism and slavery are two completely different topics. We may accociate the two because of our memory of American history, but the real history of slavery is between the small and powerful.

Insulting racists just isn't a very effective method of spreading your point of view on others. Try teaching them with love and respect, because like freedom, every man and woman deserve it. We spread love with more love, not hatred.

Oh, I see! I definitely see how insulting racists isn't a very effective method. I also happen to agree( It was helpful and informative).

[touji-za-nai]

Humans are equal.

He all hurt
We all love
we all have self conscious existence
We all can think
We all desire acceptance
We all desire rights to live
We all deserve a chance
We all deserve freedom

[raskolnikov]

I will try to keep this short, but my answer will no doubt be controversial. (Also, please forgive me that what follows is not a proper syllogism; I'm at pains to even consider it a well laid out argument. I have faith, however, that with a little more work, it can be prettied up a bit.)

(1) A slave is a person who is not free.
(2) Personhood is generally tied in some way to rationality.
(3) Rationality implies freedom since it implies an ability to weigh and to choose between two or more possible courses of action.
(4) So, if slaves are rational (which I would argue that they are), they are also free.

It appears, therefore, that what we mean when we say slave is someone who is not allowed to exercise his freedom. So, essentially, all slaves ARE free men. Moreover, if the institution of slavery denies free men the opportunity to exercise their freedom, it also denies them the ability to exercise their rationality. And herein lies the true horror of slavery: it attempts to rob a man of the very thing that gives him special status as a person; and in so doing, reduces him to a position below his natural state.

Now, the language of slavery itself clouds the issue a bit specifically because it denies that slaves are persons. What's important to remember is that slaves are born just as rational and free as any other man; and this means that slavery is an injustice committed against free men wherein some free men wrongly imprison other free men and then exploit them. If you're an American, you'll be used to the idea that freedom is an inalienable right, that is to say it's a right that cannot by any means be separated from an individual; no matter what happens, unless a person loses his rationality (which, one could argue, might make him less than a person), his rightful claim to freedom cannot ever be nullified. If you're not an American, you may not have the same knee-jerk reaction to the language I've just used, but I believe you will likely recognize and agree with it regardless. (I'm sure this last sentence will get me numerous responses to the contrary.) This is not to say that because slaves are really free that the horrors of slavery are any less than what they would be if slaves were truly not free; this is also not to say that slaves are somehow responsible for their imprisonment and exploitation. What I'm getting at is essentially the opposite: that once we begin to consider the injustice of slavery as one that is perpetrated against free men (i.e. individuals who have a rightful claim to freedom), the offense of slavery appears even more horrific. It will appear all the more horrific not only because it creates an irrational distinction between some free men and other free men, but also because it is, at its very core, anti-rational.

[roblew11332]

What is you where a slave qould you like it!!