Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    No. A country's borders limit the area that holds a population that can expect protection from the country's government. If the population appoints a competent system of government, and peoples it with competent governors then it can expect to be well protected. Protection of the population is a country's most important duty.

    The UK, for instance has reasonably well-policed boundaries, a competent system of government and competent people carrying out that government; its population is generally safe, well-protected and reasonably prosperous.

    You can contrast this with other countries where government is left to bad systems, tyrants, religious wowsers or oligarchs, in which the population's safety and cultural and economic development are not looked after.

    Countries are very important indeed, and pride in belonging to one that serves its people well is justified as it stems from the collective will and synergy of its people.
    Hobbesianism in action.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cato the Elder)
    Hobbesianism in action.
    Not being a philosopher, I didn't know that. If he agreed with me, Hobbes must have been a truly great man.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince_Paul_246)
    Africans did not sell slaves.in the main. I know white people (every white person I have ever met and spoke to about this) tries to use that as a get out of jail card
    I am white, and I have never said this.

    But yes, Africans did sell slaves, this is historical fact. Like most areas of the world, Africa was not a single community, and different states had varying attitudes towards slavery.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political correctness is the death of truth and the birth of racism. It creates division and hysteria, directing people away from the necessary path of reason. Freedom of speech is what made England such an intellectual luminary in the world because it fosters discussion and consideration of all views. Why should the possibility of offending someone's sensibilities be allowed to stand in the way of vigorous debate. Intentional verbal abuse is something different obviously, and should not be confused with free speech.

    The problem is many people want to stifle free speech when it is contra their own political ideals. Then they opportunistically claim to be grossly offended, thus killing further probing discussion on the matter. Debate isn't a hurtful slanging match. It never was. But today debates often don't get very further than scratching the surface of a topic because people become more worried that they might say something that might be deemed offensive. This is a very sad state of affairs. Debates are hijacked by 'the offended' lobby, so they are discontinued prematurely and topics are not resolved fairly. It sickens me that even in universities in the US and the UK and elsewhere, even there in what is meant to be a sacred haven of openminded learning where nothing is off the discussion table, political correctness is corrupting the learning process. Students in debates seem to focus more on how cleverly they emote their sense of disgust and outrage than focusing on contributing to an intellectual dialogue! It's all a grave insult to the noble pursuit of truth.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Let's be clear: I'm not trying to justify anything; the slave trade is abhorrent to me.
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    All I am saying is that all those involved in the capture and supply of slaves were, as individuals, equally to blame for their role in it. .
    Well - I mean, if you can’t see the irony embedded in those remarks. After all, to deny that you are trying to justify slavery, and then in your second statement actually try to justify slavery is the epitome of self-contradiction, then you’re probably not prepared to enter a dialogue about much of anything.

    It would be like if I robbed a bank and then said, “People rob banks all the time, what is the big deal?”

    Or if I slept with someone’s wife and I said, “Your wife had an affair two years ago. See! I am not that bad. Why are you angry at me?”

    Why anyone would waste more than two seconds trying to excuse something so clearly evil, like the slave trade is beyond me.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince_Paul_246)
    Well - I mean, if you can’t see the irony embedded in those remarks. After all, to deny that you are trying to justify slavery, and then in your second statement actually try to justify slavery is the epitome of self-contradiction, then you’re probably not prepared to enter a dialogue about much of anything.

    It would be like if I robbed a bank and then said, “People rob banks all the time, what is the big deal?”

    Or if I slept with someone’s wife and I said, “Your wife had an affair two years ago. See! I am not that bad. Why are you angry at me?”

    Why anyone would waste more than two seconds trying to excuse something so clearly evil, like the slave trade is beyond me.
    He hasn't defended anyone involved he is just holding the suppliers equally responsible, just like if I gave someone a gun knowing they were going to shoot someone I am equally liable for the shooting.

    It isn't like your I haven't grouped white people together then doing it in the next sentence.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince_Paul_246)
    Well - I mean, if you can’t see the irony embedded in those remarks. After all, to deny that you are trying to justify slavery, and then in your second statement actually try to justify slavery is the epitome of self-contradiction, then you’re probably not prepared to enter a dialogue about much of anything.

    It would be like if I robbed a bank and then said, “People rob banks all the time, what is the big deal?”

    Or if I slept with someone’s wife and I said, “Your wife had an affair two years ago. See! I am not that bad. Why are you angry at me?”

    Why anyone would waste more than two seconds trying to excuse something so clearly evil, like the slave trade is beyond me.
    I am genuinely failing to see where he tried to excuse it - maybe you could try and highlight that part
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince_Paul_246)
    d then in your second statement actually try to justify slavery is the epitome of self-contradiction,
    Perhaps you can explain to me how

    All I am saying is that all those involved in the capture and supply of slaves were, as individuals, equally to blame for their role in it.

    is an attempt to justify slavery?

    All those involved in the capture, sale, purchase and use of slaves were morally wrong from today's viewpoint, and from my own. It was abhorrent, and so were the perpetrators, whether they were black, white, Arab or Chinese, They were all, as individuals, equally to blame and your attempt to absolve those that were black from blame (on the grounds that they didn't have guns, which were not needed, or because they didn't invest their ill-gotten gains wisely, or for any other reason) is ridiculous.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Perhaps you can explain to me how

    All I am saying is that all those involved in the capture and supply of slaves were, as individuals, equally to blame for their role in it.

    is an attempt to justify slavery?

    All those involved in the capture, sale, purchase and use of slaves were morally wrong from today's viewpoint, and from my own. It was abhorrent, and so were the perpetrators, whether they were black, white, Arab or Chinese, They were all, as individuals, equally to blame and your attempt to absolve those that were black from blame (on the grounds that they didn't have guns, which were not needed, or because they didn't invest their ill-gotten gains wisely, or for any other reason) is ridiculous.
    I just did explain it to you, but you can't see it how it was a contradict.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BristolFresher15)
    Technically, Donald Trump will be the best president of the US ever from their own perspective; because he's the embodiment of everything wrong with that country - that's why they love him.
    exactly i was watching a us news report and they asked a trump supporter why and he said now company owns him he's on no one's payroll
    Spoiler:
    Show
    reality-he's on his own payroll for his various businesses
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince_Paul_246)
    I just did explain it to you, but you can't see it how it was a contradict.
    No. You merely asserted that the second statement contradicts the first. I can't see how, and two others have posted to agree with me. Please explalin how my second statement, the one I italicised, seeks to justify slavery,
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince_Paul_246)
    I just did explain it to you, but you can't see it how it was a contradict.
    Except you have either completely misread his post or you lack the intelligence to understand it, he stated that everyone is guilty the suppliers as well as the buyers and in your examples you have used someone defending their actions by saying that he isn't saying anyone is innocent like you are saying he is.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince_Paul_246)
    I just did explain it to you, but you can't see it how it was a contradict.

    Are you being intentionally stupid? How does his second statement excuse slavery?.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joecphillips)
    He hasn't defended anyone involved he is just holding the suppliers equally responsible, just like if I gave someone a gun knowing they were going to shoot someone I am equally liable for the shooting.

    It isn't like your I haven't grouped white people together then doing it in the next sentence.
    Defences for slavery comes in groups. The most common justifications

    1) Weak moral excuses:

    “Africans sold their own people as slaves.”
    "Africans are still selling slaves.”
    “Arab traders sold slaves too.”
    “Slavery goes back thousands of years.”
    “Most human societies have practised slavery.”
    “It was the times!”
    “The important thing to remember is that whites stopped slavery!”

    2) Playing down its benefits to whites

    “Slavery did not make economic sense.”
    “My family never owned slaves.”
    “That was Ancient History.”
    “Whites got to where they are by their own hard work.”

    3) Playing up its benefits to blacks:

    “Blacks are better off in here than in Africa.”
    “Africans were savages.”

    4) Getting people to shut up:

    “You are living in the past.”
    “Get over it!”

    They are the most common justifications I hear
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    No. You merely asserted that the second statement contradicts the first. I can't see how, and two others have posted to agree with me. Please explalin how my second statement, the one I italicised, seeks to justify slavery,
    I just did. But look if you refuse to see it, then you refuse to see it, and making you see it, is way beyond my powers.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince_Paul_246)
    Defences for slavery comes in groups.

    ...

    “Africans sold their own people as slaves.”

    ...

    They are the most common justifications i hear
    That is not an excuse for slavery. It is a statement that Africans were complicit. Nothing more, nothing less. It is what I have been saying.

    How can you possibly read it as an excuse for slavery?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince_Paul_246)
    Defences for slavery comes in groups. The most common one

    1) Weak moral excuses:

    “Africans sold their own people as slaves.”
    Africans are still selling slaves.”
    “Arab traders sold slaves too.”
    “Slavery goes back thousands of years.”
    “Most human societies have practised slavery.”
    “It was the times!”
    “The important thing to remember is that whites stopped slavery!”

    2) Playing down its benefits to whites

    “Slavery did not make economic sense.”
    “My family never owned slaves.”
    “That was Ancient History.”
    “Whites got to where they are by their own hard work.”

    3) Playing up its benefits to blacks:

    “Blacks are better off in here than in Africa.”
    “Africans were savages.”

    4) Getting people to shut up:

    “You are living in the past.”
    “Get over it!”

    They are the most common justifications i hear
    But when did he say blacks did it so it was ok?
    What he said was that you are happy to blame whites for every part but you are blinded to the fact that the suppliers (blacks) are just as responsible for what happened.
    You are saying it is ok to sell people as slaves.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BaconandSauce)
    Yet your post still exits and you haven't been banned despite the obvious racism in your post.

    It seems black people (see what I've done there) just like to whine about how they don't have the same rights as white people whilst still exercising those rights.
    Hang on... is that guy even black?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince_Paul_246)
    I just did. But look if you refuse to see it, then you refuse to see it, and making you see it, is way beyond my powers.
    In the immortal words of Rowan Atkinson, in the famous Barclaycard adverts:

    We are both fluent, Bough; sadly, in different languages.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1ksngBjmWA
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince_Paul_246)
    Defences for slavery comes in groups. The most common justifications

    1) Weak moral excuses:

    “Africans sold their own people as slaves.”
    "Africans are still selling slaves.”
    “Arab traders sold slaves too.”
    “Slavery goes back thousands of years.”
    “Most human societies have practised slavery.”
    “It was the times!”
    “The important thing to remember is that whites stopped slavery!”

    2) Playing down its benefits to whites

    “Slavery did not make economic sense.”
    “My family never owned slaves.”
    “That was Ancient History.”
    “Whites got to where they are by their own hard work.”

    3) Playing up its benefits to blacks:

    “Blacks are better off in here than in Africa.”
    “Africans were savages.”

    4) Getting people to shut up:

    “You are living in the past.”
    “Get over it!”

    They are the most common justifications I hear
    You come across as very dishonest.

    Is it okay to sell slaves?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.