I believe Slavery was an Evolutionary Step...

[Steve R.]

Finished with Dan Carlin's podcast: "68-blitz-human-resources". Dan ends his narrative of the Atlantic slave-trade pondering an unfortunate sociological spin-off of slavery, which is racism. Dan contemplating if racism will ever fade-out.

Carlin's podcast carries the date of March 6, 2022. It was probably months in the making, putting it's origin near the beginning of the Biden administration. The reason for bringing this up, is that it is those on the "left" have become very proactive in keeping racism "alive". Unbelievably, racism is actually being kept alive (for political gain) by those who assert to oppose it. Racism has been weaponized by the "left". This "answers" Carlin's racism question.

According to those on the left we must now promote racism to end racism. Very Orwellian. Biden through several of this Executive Orders has actually made it official US government policy to use race based criteria for decision making. This is basically a nullification of equal opportunity laws established during the 1960s and a rejection of King's "I have a dream speech" which looked forward to an end of racism.

Getting back to the original debate question asked by this thread. Turns-out that Dan has an earlier (Feb. 2009) podcast: "Hardcore History 26 – (BLITZ) Addicted to Bondage". I have not listened to it yet. Fortunately, is is shorter at just over one (1) hour.

"Is slavery a natural feature of human societies? Dan looks at this timeless, evil institution and wonders if we have made as much progress freeing ourselves from its influence as we think we have."

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

Why didn't Hitler enslave the Jews?

Jordan asks a good question. .

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

 

[Steve R.]

Why didn't Hitler enslave the Jews?

Jordan asks a good question. .

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

First, I listened to all of "Hardcore History 26 – (BLITZ) Addicted to Bondage". It is very good. Additionally, slavery does have an "intersection" with with Peterson's observations. Peterson is correct that a rationale government would have used slavery (like China) to increase the nation's power, but for some highly illogical reason (ideology??), the Nazi government fomented mayhem. Ironically (remove the slavery theme from Peterson's narrative), Peterson's narrative would apply to what the Biden administration is currently doing to this country. The Biden administration, to unilaterally implement its ideology, is fanning the flames of mayhem.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

The Biden administration, to unilaterally implement its ideology, is fanning the flames of mayhem.

It does look like that is their goal. But why? What do they gain?

 

[Steve R.]

It does look like that is their goal. But why? What do they gain?

They are creating in a new order based on identity politics. Traditional institutions are being "cancelled" to enable the new social structure, essentially a copycat of the French Revolution without the guillotine (so far). The new social culture will include the establishment of a perpetual underclass dependent on government welfare, who will always support (vote for) the Nanny State.

Recall Biden's The Life of Linda, a cheap knockoff of Obama's Life of Julia.

 

[NauticalGent]

It does look like that is their goal. But why? What do they gain?

Misdirection mostly.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

Good explanation of slavery:-

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtube.com

 

[Pat Hartman]

We can't really talk about that in public. Facts can never enter into a discussion of slavery.

 

[GPGeorge]

Of course, what everyone forgets is that the British who sold the slaves GOT them from the victors in a tribal war. Slaves were "spoils of war" in Africa at the time that the first slaves were sold to North American land owners. Tribal warfare was commonplace in Africa at that time, and in fact is still commonplace. As recently as 1994, there was a war between two ethnic tribes, the Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda. If you take a look at what is going on in the Darfur region in Sudan, you will find that slavery is rampant, particularly sex slavery as the result of that conflict.

I have to disagree with that Rwandan example. It was all-out genocide, sponsored by a ruling elite of Hutus in Rwanda. The only sense in which it could have been considered a "war" was the futile attempts by the Tutsis to defend themselves. Over 700,000 Tutsis were slaughtered, a great many by being hacked to death with machetes by mobs roaming the country-side.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

My wording was a little less precise than I wanted. The point was that even recently, Africa has ethnic wars with lots of slaughter. The Rwanda war didn't end up with slavery but it WAS a cross-ethnic conflict. Probably no slavery because the world was watching TOO closely.

The Darfur region, however, IS an example of some of the women become sex slaves. That has been documented.

 

[ColinEssex]

The Darfur region, however, IS an example of some of the women become sex slaves. That has been documented.

Apparently they even have sex slaves in Kuwait, even Pat here employed one.
Col

 

[Pat Hartman]

You're not funny Colin.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Col, if you recall that discussion, she employed the person for child care assistance and only found out her past employment later. When you make a comment like that, you "innocently" cast aspersions on another member. STOP that. She can defend herself but as a moderator, I now have the duty to also defend members from unwarranted attacks, no matter how casually or innocuously they were made.

 

[ColinEssex]

So my alleged 'attack' comment is not true then.
I thought Pat was in Kuwait and employed a nanny who was also, or had been a sex slave. I must have misinterpreted Pat's comment.
Col

 

[ColinEssex]

You're not funny Colin.

I wasn't trying to be. I merely quoted what you said. To spell it out, I was indicating that sex slaves can be in any country, even middle Eastern ones.
Col

 

[The_Doc_Man]

So my alleged 'attack' comment is not true then.
I thought Pat was in Kuwait and employed a nanny who was also, or had been a sex slave. I must have misinterpreted Pat's comment.
Col

Your comment was true but was stated in a way that omitted the fact that Pat didn't know until after the fact about the woman's situation. Which is highly important for understanding of Pat's role. To leave out that "delayed recognition" fact offers an implication that I am SURE you didn't want to really offer. It was the veiled implication that triggered me, Col.

 

[Pat Hartman]

It was a deliberate lie of omission Colin. I was just pointing out your scummieness. If you have some criticism to make, make it to my face like a man or stop the passive-aggressive attacks.

 

[ColinEssex]

If you have some criticism to make, make it to my face like a man

Where was I critical? I only pointed out that sex workers/slaves are worldwide. Anyway, that aside, I'd be happy to meet up although it may be tricky, there is a pond between the two countries. But, if ever you're in the London area, knock me up and I'll buy you a chinese.
Col

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

It was a deliberate lie of omission Colin. I was just pointing out your scummieness

When I was asked if I wanted to be a moderator, I said OK, but I don't want to moderate in the water cooler. Do you know why I said that? Rhetorical question, it was because of you Colin. I had seen the way you interact on the forum, this again, a typical example.

I'm quite capable, as a moderator, of dealing with you Colin, but it would be at the expense of my honour & dignity. Interacting with you would have brought me down to your level. Hence I have only "taken you to task" a couple of times.

Your comment about Pat was reported to the moderators by a member of 20 years, someone who doesn't normally take issue with things. I mention this in the hope that you start to see how others perceive your comments.

 

[ColinEssex]

I dont use language like 'scummieness' or any other similar remark to another member. I'll let it go for now, maybe a heat of the moment response, Pat does seem to be a little tense.
Col