Crimes of History. A reckoning?

[Mandy Lifeboats]

17 minutes ago, TheAuthority said:

Wow and Live Aid was only a couple of years before too 

I remember Phil Collins singing  "Revenge For the Benin Trade Mission"  to the tune of "In The Air Tonight."

It was emotional. 

[maqroll]

The militancy of the "white right" is a reaction to demographic trends and shifts exacerbated by globalization, liberal immigration policies and a plummeting white birthrate. Their movement has momentum, and charismatic figureheads. They have a media and propaganda apparatus, and in some cases, blue chip corporate support. In the USA, Brazil and Germany, they have broad support in police and military services. White supremacy is under threat like never before and these people are willing to commit atrocities to maintain the global hierarchy. I fear we are just scratching the surface of what is to come.

[HanoiVillan]

Here's something we could maybe chew over:

Revealed: how UK spies incited mass murder of Indonesia’s communists

'A propaganda campaign orchestrated by Britain played a crucial part in one of the most brutal massacres of the postwar 20th century, shocking new evidence reveals.

British officials secretly deployed black propaganda in the 1960s to urge prominent Indonesians to “cut out” the “communist cancer”.

It is estimated that at least 500,000 people – some estimates go to three million – linked to the Indonesia Communist party (PKI) were eliminated between 1965 and 1966.

Recently declassified Foreign Office documents show that British propagandists secretly incited anti-communists, including army generals, to eliminate the PKI. The campaign of apparently spontaneous mass murder, now known to have been orchestrated by the Indonesian army, was later described by the CIA as one of the worst mass murders of the century.

As the massacres started in October 1965 British officials called for “the PKI and all communist organisations” to “be eliminated”. The nation, they warned, would be in danger “as long as the communist leaders are at large and their rank and file are allowed to go unpunished”.

Britain launched its propaganda offensive against Indonesia in response to President Sukarno’s hostility to the formation of its former colonies into the Malayan federation which from 1963 resulted in a low-level conflict and armed incursions by the Indonesian army across the border. In 1965 specialist propagandists from the Foreign Office’s information research department (IRD) were sent to Singapore to produce black propaganda to undermine Sukarno’s regime. The PKI was a strong supporter of both the president and the Confrontation movement.

[...]

The propagandists called for “the PKI and all it stands for” to be “eliminated for all time” advising its influential readers that “procrastination and half-hearted measures can only lead to… our ultimate and complete destruction”. Over the following weeks massacres of alleged PKI members, few if any with any involvement in the attempted coup, and other leftists spread across the archipelago.

There can be little doubt that British diplomats became aware of what was happening. Not only could GCHQ intercept and read Indonesian government communications, but its Chai Keng monitoring station in Singapore enabled the British to trace the progress of army units involved in suppressing the PKI.

According to Dr Duncan Campbell, an investigative journalist and expert on GCHQ, they had technology enabling listeners to “locate the positions of Indonesian military commanders and units who were sending, relaying and receiving orders for the roundup and murder of those supposedly linked to the PKI”.

A letter to the British ambassador in Djakarta from the “coordinator of political warfare”, a Foreign Office propaganda specialist called Norman Reddaway, who arrived in Singapore in the aftermath of the attempted coup, reveals the policy was “to conceal the fact that the butcheries have taken place with the encouragement of the generals”, in the hope that the generals “will do us better than the old gang”.

Tari Lang, then a teenager in Indonesia whose father and mother, the late human rights activist Carmel Budiardjo, were imprisoned by the army, says the documents are “horrendous” and the British government bears some responsibility for what happened. “I am angry that my government, the British government, did this. The British did nothing to stop the violence once it had started.”'

from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/17/revealed-how-uk-spies-incited-mass-of-indonesias-communists

I would strongly recommend anyone interested in this period of history - and our involvement in it - to read Vincent Bevins' 'The Jakarta Method'.

[A'Villan]

On 04/05/2022 at 22:27, sparrow1988 said:

And the worst part was they included Ireland in their propagandda video. I mean what did we ever do?

Worked as slaves on plantations just like the African Americans. The eugenics movement didn't start with Nazi Germany.

Ireland flies under the radar and has to cop it sweet because no one is going to believe the whitest of white on the planet, albinos aside, that they are really victim of some of the most blatant and vile discrimination there is.

It's foreign to most that evil cares not for colour, they can't fathom that white people institutionalise oppression and suppression by design to ensure that other white people remain unable to thrive and prosper. Evil just wants to erode and corrupt by all means at any and every opportunity. 

Unfortunately we are so busy with our heads up our asses being patriotic and  discriminating against other people's situation and actions, that we've overlooked and foregone humanity in doing so. 

Edited May 5, 2022 by A'Villan

[sparrow1988]

7 hours ago, A'Villan said:

Worked as slaves on plantations just like the African Americans. The eugenics movement didn't start with Nazi Germany.

Ireland flies under the radar and has to cop it sweet because no one is going to believe the whitest of white on the planet, albinos aside, that they are really victim of some of the most blatant and vile discrimination there is.

It's foreign to most that evil cares not for colour, they can't fathom that white people institutionalise oppression and suppression by design to ensure that other white people remain unable to thrive and prosper. Evil just wants to erode and corrupt by all means at any and every opportunity. 

Unfortunately we are so busy with our heads up our asses being patriotic and  discriminating against other people's situation and actions, that we've overlooked and foregone humanity in doing so. 

Oh no, not the Irish were slaves arguments. Have a look through these articles.

https://limerick1914.medium.com/all-of-my-work-on-the-irish-slaves-meme-2015-16-4965e445802a

There were clear and distinct differences between the type of servitude/slavery. I agree the Irish have been discriminated against and have been the victims of oppression throughout history. However the slaves argument doesn’t wash. 

This is also wildly off topic so if you want to continue it, I’m happy to discuss it over DM or in another more relevant topic if one exists. 

[A'Villan]

54 minutes ago, sparrow1988 said:

Oh no, not the Irish were slaves arguments. Have a look through these articles.

https://limerick1914.medium.com/all-of-my-work-on-the-irish-slaves-meme-2015-16-4965e445802a

There were clear and distinct differences between the type of servitude/slavery. I agree the Irish have been discriminated against and have been the victims of oppression throughout history. However the slaves argument doesn’t wash. 

This is also wildly off topic so if you want to continue it, I’m happy to discuss it over DM or in another more relevant topic if one exists. 

If we were on the same wavelength you'd be citing the argument that slavery doesn't really belong to any race and comes in a myriad of forms. Some more apparent than others. Some more acknowledged as legitimate than others. Denying something doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't happening, and oftentimes it actually enables it to continue unchallenged, exacerbating the problems it causes. No matter if we are to pretend it doesn't exist and are removed from suffering the consequences.

It's not all that wildly off topic. We are discussing the atrocities of one people deciding they have the entitlement to inflict war and that which comes along with it, on another people. Albeit this thread is specific to the Russian and Ukrainian situation, the techniques and repercussions are universal. That's my opinion at least.

We can take it to DM if you feel like you want to engage, and that this might derail others discussion. 

[sparrow1988]

27 minutes ago, A'Villan said:

If we were on the same wavelength you'd be citing the argument that slavery doesn't really belong to any race and comes in a myriad of forms. Some more apparent than others. Some more acknowledged as legitimate than others. Denying something doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't happening, and oftentimes it actually enables it to continue unchallenged, exacerbating the problems it causes. No matter if we are to pretend it doesn't exist and are removed from suffering the consequences.

It's not all that wildly off topic. We are discussing the atrocities of one people deciding they have the entitlement to inflict war and that which comes along with it, on another people. Albeit this thread is specific to the Russian and Ukrainian situation, the techniques and repercussions are universal. That's my opinion at least.

We can take it to DM if you feel like you want to engage, and that this might derail others discussion. 

If you think that it should stay, then I'll carry it on here. The Irish are referred to as "indentured servants", or are said to have been subjected to "indentured/penal servitude" by historians. Obviuosly, this is also abhorrent and shouldn't have happened. This usually invloved a period of time which was to be served before becoming "free". It is mentioned in those articles that in the Carribean this period was typically 5 to 7 years to "cover the cost of the trip across the Atlantic". Timescales of decades are also mentioned.

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/04/19/how-myth-irish-slaves-became-favorite-meme-racists-online

The Cromwellian policy of forced transportation to the colonies in the 1650s (which included an estimated 10,000 Irish people) understandably scars our collective memory and it deserves both respect and close attention from anyone interested in the history of the unfree labour systems in the Atlantic world. Prior to the sugar revolution and the massive investment by Europeans in enslaving and dehumanizing African people, the living and working conditions of servants and slaves were similar. As the British colonies transitioned to large-scale sugar plantations both groups were exploited for profit, indentured servants for decades and enslaved Africans for centuries.

There is a subtle but distinct difference between the two types of slavery/servitude. Some Irish even went willingly to the Carribean/modern-day southern USA in an attempt to escape British oppression at home.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/17/us/irish-slaves-myth.html?_r=0

The legal differences between indentured servitude and chattel slavery were profound, according to Matthew Reilly, an archaeologist who studies Barbados. Unlike slaves, servants were considered legally human. Their servitude was based on a contract that limited their service to a finite period of time, usually about seven years, in exchange for passage to the colonies. They did not pass their unfree status on to descendants.

“An indenture implies two people have entered into a contract with each other but slavery is not a contract,” said Leslie Harris, a professor of African-American history at Northwestern University. “It is often about being a prisoner of war or being bought or sold bodily as part of a trade. That is a critical distinction.”

The difference between servitude and slavery is a very important difference, seen as "The Irish/Whites were slaves too" is a sentiment pedelled by Neo-Nazi groups, Holocaust deniers, Fascists and so on. It is used to play down the hereditary slavery experienced over centuries by the African race and their quest for reparations. So much as to say 'The whites were slaves as well, they got over it, why can't you lot'. This 'get over it, we did' attitude is used by the above mentioned groups particularly in the US as proof of the inferiority of blacks and to further their belief of white supremacy.

Obviously, slavery existed long before the colonies in the 'New World', for example in Ancient Rome, even to an extent today with human trafficking. However the Irish were not slaves in the sense of their African counterparts in America and the Carribean, at least not in the sense that it is used by the groups mentioned above. They became free after a certain period of time. Slavery in that part of the world has a very specific legal meaning. What the Irish experienced was more akin to modern-day human trafficking, just then it was carried out by governments. Again I must stress, not a good thing.

I reacted strongly to the Irish were slaves comment and always do because of how it is exploited by certain groups. Futhering the "myth" or sentiment gives creedence to what these groups are saying in order to play down the enforced slavery of the African people and their descendents and I urge you to be careful how you express it for this very reason.

[A'Villan]

12 hours ago, sparrow1988 said:

If you think that it should stay, then I'll carry it on here. The Irish are referred to as "indentured servants", or are said to have been subjected to "indentured/penal servitude" by historians. Obviuosly, this is also abhorrent and shouldn't have happened. This usually invloved a period of time which was to be served before becoming "free". It is mentioned in those articles that in the Carribean this period was typically 5 to 7 years to "cover the cost of the trip across the Atlantic". Timescales of decades are also mentioned.

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/04/19/how-myth-irish-slaves-became-favorite-meme-racists-online

The Cromwellian policy of forced transportation to the colonies in the 1650s (which included an estimated 10,000 Irish people) understandably scars our collective memory and it deserves both respect and close attention from anyone interested in the history of the unfree labour systems in the Atlantic world. Prior to the sugar revolution and the massive investment by Europeans in enslaving and dehumanizing African people, the living and working conditions of servants and slaves were similar. As the British colonies transitioned to large-scale sugar plantations both groups were exploited for profit, indentured servants for decades and enslaved Africans for centuries.

There is a subtle but distinct difference between the two types of slavery/servitude. Some Irish even went willingly to the Carribean/modern-day southern USA in an attempt to escape British oppression at home.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/17/us/irish-slaves-myth.html?_r=0

The legal differences between indentured servitude and chattel slavery were profound, according to Matthew Reilly, an archaeologist who studies Barbados. Unlike slaves, servants were considered legally human. Their servitude was based on a contract that limited their service to a finite period of time, usually about seven years, in exchange for passage to the colonies. They did not pass their unfree status on to descendants.

“An indenture implies two people have entered into a contract with each other but slavery is not a contract,” said Leslie Harris, a professor of African-American history at Northwestern University. “It is often about being a prisoner of war or being bought or sold bodily as part of a trade. That is a critical distinction.”

The difference between servitude and slavery is a very important difference, seen as "The Irish/Whites were slaves too" is a sentiment pedelled by Neo-Nazi groups, Holocaust deniers, Fascists and so on. It is used to play down the hereditary slavery experienced over centuries by the African race and their quest for reparations. So much as to say 'The whites were slaves as well, they got over it, why can't you lot'. This 'get over it, we did' attitude is used by the above mentioned groups particularly in the US as proof of the inferiority of blacks and to further their belief of white supremacy.

Obviously, slavery existed long before the colonies in the 'New World', for example in Ancient Rome, even to an extent today with human trafficking. However the Irish were not slaves in the sense of their African counterparts in America and the Carribean, at least not in the sense that it is used by the groups mentioned above. They became free after a certain period of time. Slavery in that part of the world has a very specific legal meaning. What the Irish experienced was more akin to modern-day human trafficking, just then it was carried out by governments. Again I must stress, not a good thing.

I reacted strongly to the Irish were slaves comment and always do because of how it is exploited by certain groups. Futhering the "myth" or sentiment gives creedence to what these groups are saying in order to play down the enforced slavery of the African people and their descendents and I urge you to be careful how you express it for this very reason.

Thank you for this. Sincerely. For the energy and discipline taken here. You offer clarity and insight into your end of the discussion. 

Those qualities is something I lacked in articulating my views and what I intended to say has in its essence been lost in translation, and consequently has elicited your response.

Truly, thank you for the care taken and considered approach to it. I learned where you are coming from.

I'd like to return to the discussion with a view to you being able to see my views in the light you have shared yours with.

I'm not in a position to do that at present.

I have a question for you though.

You say that some Irish willingly went on their way to elude what was on offer if they didn't, or at least you cite that version of events to illustrate a distinction. 

Would you say that the native Americans willingly accepted their small pox infected gifts from the British? How do you think that served them ultimately?

I have many African friends and associations. Largely through basketball but I honestly try to see the best in people, and I'm fortunate and blessed enough to be in a position where I've enjoyed countless conversations with that many African men and women that I can say for certain in my mind, we all bring a wonderfully unique perspective. Regardless of whether or not something is an 'according to Hoyle' definition of events and accounts, we should remember that we are all only able to represent our understanding of what is or has happened, and that if we remain open to the possibility it could be improved, then we are learning a greater truth at each step 

Edited May 6, 2022 by A'Villan

[maqroll]

The GOP wants to literally outlaw even discussing in a school setting any aspect of American history that "causes discomfort to any one (White) group of people". 

Not sure if this agenda will delay or quicken a "reckoning", but I'm guessing the latter.

They are trying to turn us into Rhodesia and the backlash is already happening. 

 

[A'Villan]

2 hours ago, maqroll said:

The GOP wants to literally outlaw even discussing in a school setting any aspect of American history that "causes discomfort to any one (White) group of people". 

Not sure if this agenda will delay or quicken a "reckoning", but I'm guessing the latter.

They are trying to turn us into Rhodesia and the backlash is already happening. 

 

You should read some of the laws passed with the Patriot Act in the USA and the anti terrorism laws here down under.

 

• Quote

  Significant restrictions on the right of any citizen to express certain opinions, including; criticism, or "urging disaffection", of the sovereign, the constitution, the government, the law, or 'different groups'. Exemptions may exist where the target of criticism is agreed to be 'in error'. Exemptions appear to exist where the claim is that a feature of a group of people is in some way offensive to the mainstream of society. Onus of proof is on the defendant, the presumption is not of innocence.

   

[sparrow1988]

On 06/05/2022 at 21:34, A'Villan said:

Thank you for this. Sincerely. For the energy and discipline taken here. You offer clarity and insight into your end of the discussion. 

Those qualities is something I lacked in articulating my views and what I intended to say has in its essence been lost in translation, and consequently has elicited your response.

Truly, thank you for the care taken and considered approach to it. I learned where you are coming from.

I'd like to return to the discussion with a view to you being able to see my views in the light you have shared yours with.

I'm not in a position to do that at present.

I have a question for you though.

You say that some Irish willingly went on their way to elude what was on offer if they didn't, or at least you cite that version of events to illustrate a distinction. 

Would you say that the native Americans willingly accepted their small pox infected gifts from the British? How do you think that served them ultimately?

I have many African friends and associations. Largely through basketball but I honestly try to see the best in people, and I'm fortunate and blessed enough to be in a position where I've enjoyed countless conversations with that many African men and women that I can say for certain in my mind, we all bring a wonderfully unique perspective. Regardless of whether or not something is an 'according to Hoyle' definition of events and accounts, we should remember that we are all only able to represent our understanding of what is or has happened, and that if we remain open to the possibility it could be improved, then we are learning a greater truth at each step 

I wouldn't say that they were overly happy contracting the disease that wiped out a lot of their people. They do however, I assume, now have an immunity against the disease. All in all though, based on the fact that the indigenous populations of the Americas, north and south, are as a whole largely treated as second class citizens by their respective governments, I would say that they would probably be happier had the Europeans never set foot in that part of the world.

[Ingram85]

I think people get too caught up in white people did this, Africans did that, the Turks did this etc… 

As soon as people start to look less at skin colour/nationality as a cause of the worlds ills and more at class/status and who is in positions of authority as the biggest thing that affects atrocities and injustices then we can start to move forward. I don’t feel guilty for things that white men have done or will do and I don’t expect anyone else to feel guilty about things people like them have done or will do either.

The rich and powerful (of which there are people of every creed and colour in the world in these positions) are mainly to blame. Power and money are to be held onto and hoarded by any means, geopolitics are to be manipulated to make more money and get more power. Human suffering is a commodity to be exploited not a problem to be solved. 

 

Edited May 8, 2022 by Ingram85

[PussEKatt]

IMHO, I think the "Do Gooders" are a really big problem all over the world.

[chrisp65]

I’m with the Pussy, the less people we can have doing good the better.

[MakemineVanilla]

1 hour ago, chrisp65 said:

I’m with the Pussy, the less people we can have doing good the better.

I would point out that "Do Gooders" does have a meaning which is different from just doing good deeds.

Do-gooders are people who have good intensions but their actions turn out to have damaging outcomes.

[blandy]

18 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

I would point out that "Do Gooders" does have a meaning which is different from just doing good deeds.

Do-gooders are people who have good intensions but their actions turn out to have damaging outcomes.

Yeah, though it’s a bit of a 2 way thing. Do-gooder is often a meddler/someone interfering in stuff that’s nothing to do with them, but often people genuinely making things better are called dogooder to try to get them out the way of someone exploiting others

[chrisp65]

Yep, agree with both those descriptions, but same as ‘woke’ it has predominantly become a way for scared old white guys criticising anything that disrupts their understanding of the world.

[MakemineVanilla]

8 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Yep, agree with both those descriptions, but same as ‘woke’ it has predominantly become a way for scared old guys criticising anything that disrupts their understanding of the world.

FTFY!

[chrisp65]

Just now, MakemineVanilla said:

FTFY!

I guess we have to throw some women in there too if we’re being inclusive about this.

[Mandy Lifeboats]

56 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

I guess we have to throw some women in there too if we’re being inclusive about this.

How dare you exclude the Gender Neutral.