Comment by PuppyTailWags
4 years ago
I always found it useful to consider the fact that America was at one point an aparthied nation. Its origins relied on the attempted extinction of a race of people who already lived here, then it lived for over a century with an entire race of people as literal property, breeding them like dogs or cats and separating their families with no respect to their humanity. A swathe of america fought a civil war to continue this treatment of this race of humans and the attempt as a nation to reconcile this failed within a generation.
There are still members of this enslaved race that, when they were born, were deprived the right to vote because of their race.
In this historical context, America's relationship with race does not defy reasoning. It's the only reasonable outcome of a nation that began with humans of one skin color being 3/5 of humans of another skin color.
None of this is uniquely American. Europe, the Middle East, East Asia, Australia, Africa, etc. all have unique but similar histories of genocide and enslavement. And it was happening in the Americas long before any Europeans arrived too.
On the contrary, enslaving a specific skin-color is relatively recent invention. Although the concept of slavery is old, the way slavery was applied is relatively new. America also held onto the enslavement of a specific skin-color most recently, and like I said, there are still people alive who were legally barred from voting purely because of their identified skin color.
Is it any more or any less racist to enslave people on skin color vs nationality? The romans enslaved germanic peoples. I feel like this is the same amount of racism as anything else.
4 replies →
Sadly, slavery and indentured servitude are still legal in the US, and, in absolute head count, are currently a much bigger business than they were before the civil war.