The Flag

[Buffy]

Were Asians discriminated against at the same time blacks were?

Roughly. Do you think that means they were discriminated against in exactly the same way or started from the same starting point?

 

Black people were captured and brought here as slaves. Those that were freed, generally did find work as servants or as labor or if they had any chance at a business at all were "sharecroppers" or similarly part of larger white-owned operations where their profits were squeezed to "keep them in their place." There were some who broke out and became somewhat successful and those started HBCUs to help educate blacks (who were kept from attending white colleges), but the limited funds meant they had few opportunities to educate themselves to the same level as whites.

 

Asians pretty exclusively emigrated here in groups and brought assets and entire businesses with them. Those who came in the California Gold Rush formed their own mining groups since no white people would work with them or later organize as mechanization of mining took off, and because they had businesses and money, they could invest in ways that blacks of the same era could only dream of. Similarly, they brought their own teachers from China and were quite frankly far better educated than similar white people. Since they imported the entire economic system with them, they could operate successful economies in the ghettos that the whites forced them into.

 

Moreover, as the Exclusion Acts took hold, the majority of them said "screw this" and did what you want: they moved back to China. What was left was a self-sustaining, isolated set of communities with strong internal ties and the ability to function without whites providing the jobs.

 

So no, it's not the same at all.

 

I've described this too you before here, and you seem to have absorbed only what doesn't cause cognitive dissonance with your racist tendencies:

 

Blacks tend to give up more than Asians do! They say, "Life's unfair, woe is me!"

Wow. Stunning.

 

The Asians just work harder. Asians tend to annoy some people by being so successful, I heard that mentioned about the Chinese railroad workers. Blacks go , "Boohoo, my grandpa was a slave, there is nothing I can do to improve my life, maybe I'll just rob a liquor store." Some of the highest rates of growth in the World is in Asia, while Africa boils with violence and terrorism. My theory is that Asians are more group oriented than Africans, they tend not to like chaos and violence. Africans act more as individuals, they think of themselves first and how they can get ahead, many sold other blacks into slavery after taking their stuff in tribal wars. With Asians it was always family first self second, that is why in China, the family name comes first and the individual's name comes second. I once dated a Chinese girl, believe it or not!

Well what I said to you in an earlier post was that the Asians worked harder than the whites, and that annoyed the white folks. They did make more money, but as I just said, they had an entire economic infrastructure and very significant assets that they brought with them.

 

Yes, both Africa and Asia were colonized by western powers, however just as happened in the US, in Africa, the colonizers built the businesses and used the native population as cheap labor. In Asia, they had civilization and economic systems that in many ways rivaled the western powers, and while the guns and warships kept them in power temporarily, the administration and industry in these places--including south and south-east Asia as well as China--was run and operated by the native population, the colonizers merely took a cut of the exports.

 

That you would see no difference between these two is not surprising. Willful ignorance is a powerful force.

 

 

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength, :phones:

Buffy

[TomKalbfus]

Roughly. Do you think that means they were discriminated against in exactly the same way or started from the same starting point?

 

Black people were captured and brought here as slaves. Those that were freed, generally did find work as servants or as labor or if they had any chance at a business at all were "sharecroppers" or similarly part of larger white-owned operations where their profits were squeezed to "keep them in their place." There were some who broke out and became somewhat successful and those started HBCUs to help educate blacks (who were kept from attending white colleges), but the limited funds meant they had few opportunities to educate themselves to the same level as whites.

 

Asians pretty exclusively emigrated here in groups and brought assets and entire businesses with them. Those who came in the California Gold Rush formed their own mining groups since no white people would work with them or later organize as mechanization of mining took off, and because they had businesses and money, they could invest in ways that blacks of the same era could only dream of. Similarly, they brought their own teachers from China and were quite frankly far better educated than similar white people. Since they imported the entire economic system with them, they could operate successful economies in the ghettos that the whites forced them into.

 

Moreover, as the Exclusion Acts took hold, the majority of them said "screw this" and did what you want: they moved back to China. What was left was a self-sustaining, isolated set of communities with strong internal ties and the ability to function without whites providing the jobs.

 

So no, it's not the same at all.

 

I've described this too you before here, and you seem to have absorbed only what doesn't cause cognitive dissonance with your racist tendencies:

 

Wow. Stunning.

 

Well what I said to you in an earlier post was that the Asians worked harder than the whites, and that annoyed the white folks. They did make more money, but as I just said, they had an entire economic infrastructure and very significant assets that they brought with them.

 

Yes, both Africa and Asia were colonized by western powers, however just as happened in the US, in Africa, the colonizers built the businesses and used the native population as cheap labor. In Asia, they had civilization and economic systems that in many ways rivaled the western powers, and while the guns and warships kept them in power temporarily, the administration and industry in these places--including south and south-east Asia as well as China--was run and operated by the native population, the colonizers merely took a cut of the exports.

 

That you would see no difference between these two is not surprising. Willful ignorance is a powerful force.

 

 

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength, :phones:

Buffy

The Asians' main problem was that their own governments were "suffocating" them. They tend to worship their "Emperors" and their "Emperors" often make stupid decisions for them, as they are only human, the best people often don't get into the government as the "Emperors" built a personality cult around themselves to keep out potential rivals, thus the better man or woman doesn't get to lead and the "Stupid Emperors" remain in power, that is how China got "caught with its pants down" and colonized by western powers. One advantage that Asians have is they are used to large scale governments while Africans were used to tribes. One thing I do notice, Asians often tend to be Democrats when they become American citizens, maybe that is because Asians favor big government structures much like the ones the Democrats are trying to impose on America. Democrats like to rule from the top, and Asians just love to be ruled, they worship their Emperors, create personality cults around them, they are highly organized of course, but with bad leadership, they sometimes highly organized to make stupid collective decisions as a society, they defer to their leaders, even when those leaders are wrong, this is what holds them back.

 

You ever wonder why sub-Saharan Africa was so primitive? Why weren't their many civilizations there? The major civilizations grew up in the middle east, in China, and along the Mediterranean coast, but in sub-Saharan Africa it is all "Unga Bunga!" Some tribes have their members do ridiculous things like slip rings under their necks in order to stretch them, as they find people with long necks to be attractive, other people try to insert disks under their lips and ear lobes in order to stretch them. When the European colonizers came, they threw spears at them, sometimes used poison blow darts and other primitive devices to defend their territory, The Europeans simply allied with some tribes to help them conquer others, and the conquered tribes became a source of slaves, the tribes allied with the Europeans then sold those slaves to the European slave traders in exchange for trinkets, maybe a shiny steel knife or perhaps a gun or whatever. Why was it so easy for the Europeans? Why were blacks in Africa so isolated that they were unaware of the technological revolution happening in Europe, and they still had blowguns, and spears when the Europeans had guns? At least the American Indians had an excuse, ut sub-Saharan Africa bordered on the great Empire of Egypt which was colonized by Alexander the Great and his successors. Greek learning and education didn't seem to penetrate the Saharan desert. Apparently the Saharan desert was such a formidable barrier that no one could penetrate it, so when European ships arrived on their shores, it might as well have been Australia. So why did the Europeans have such a technological advantage, were they great at keeping the secret of gun powder and guns surprising the spear chucking natives in many places with their "thunder sticks?". The British Empire expanded to cover one third of the land area on Earth because of all those primitive societies around they world that they conquered, the question is, why were their so many for them to conquer?

Edited October 22, 2017 by TomKalbfus

[gr8vity]

The Asians' main problem was that their own governments were "suffocating" them. They tend to worship their "Emperors" and their "Emperors" often make stupid decisions for them, as they are only human, the best people often don't get into the government as the "Emperors" built a personality cult around themselves to keep out potential rivals, thus the better man or woman doesn't get to lead and the "Stupid Emperors" remain in power, that is how China got "caught with its pants down" and colonized by western powers. One advantage that Asians have is they are used to large scale governments while Africans were used to tribes. One thing I do notice, Asians often tend to be Democrats when they become American citizens, maybe that is because Asians favor big government structures much like the ones the Democrats are trying to impose on America. Democrats like to rule from the top, and Asians just love to be ruled, they worship their Emperors, create personality cults around them, they are highly organized of course, but with bad leadership, they sometimes highly organized to make stupid collective decisions as a society, they defer to their leaders, even when those leaders are wrong, this is what holds them back.

 

You ever wonder why sub-Saharan Africa was so primitive? Why weren't their many civilizations there? The major civilizations grew up in the middle east, in China, and along the Mediterranean coast, but in sub-Saharan Africa it is all "Unga Bunga!" Some tribes have their members do ridiculous things like slip rings under their necks in order to stretch them, as they find people with long necks to be attractive, other people try to insert disks under their lips and ear lobes in order to stretch them. When the European colonizers came, they threw spears at them, sometimes used poison blow darts and other primitive devices to defend their territory, The Europeans simply allied with some tribes to help them conquer others, and the conquered tribes became a source of slaves, the tribes allied with the Europeans then sold those slaves to the European slave traders in exchange for trinkets, maybe a shiny steel knife or perhaps a gun or whatever. Why was it so easy for the Europeans? Why were blacks in Africa so isolated that they were unaware of the technological revolution happening in Europe, and they still had blowguns, and spears when the Europeans had guns? At least the American Indians had an excuse, ut sub-Saharan Africa bordered on the great Empire of Egypt which was colonized by Alexander the Great and his successors. Greek learning and education didn't seem to penetrate the Saharan desert. Apparently the Saharan desert was such a formidable barrier that no one could penetrate it, so when European ships arrived on their shores, it might as well have been Australia. So why did the Europeans have such a technological advantage, were they great at keeping the secret of gun powder and guns surprising the spear chucking natives in many places with their "thunder sticks?". The British Empire expanded to cover one third of the land area on Earth because of all those primitive societies around they world that they conquered, the question is, why were their so many for them to conquer?

 

sounds racist to me 

[BestPlaya1]

Very interesting debate .Racism is like any other social disease it exists in almost every region in the world along with other forms of social prejudices such as caste system,tribalism etc.it is off topic but dont you think racism ,anti-sematism etc are ostensibly overhyped by the western (mainstream ) media for some reasons they know best?

[Maine farmer]

 but dont you think racism ,anti-sematism etc are ostensibly overhyped by the western (mainstream ) media for some reasons they know best?i

 

For some, it depends on who is being discriminated against, and for a lot of people, if it doesn't happen to them, then it either doesn't happen or doesn't matter.