Coca-Cola Agrees The Winners Can't Be White.

reply to post by badw0lf


Um... what? I was making a reference to your avatar. You know, The Hitcher from the Mighty Boosh...

Well I took the time last night to watch both performances from beginning to end.

NO CONTEST.


THE AKA girls ( 2nd place ) were wearing what looked like business suits, which would have been hard to move in normally, they hardly made any noise, stuffed up often and moved slowly.
It general it looked like they had not practiced much. That is in comparison with 1st place. They instead looked sharp and the audiences reaction said it all. Outstanding.

At least one good thing will come out of it, and that's the standard of competition should raise next year. Because if AKA got second, how bad were the others.

P.S. I have now boycotted all CC products . It is the least I can do to not support corporate sponsored and endorsed racism. Now I believe everyone is a bit racist privately, people are people, but to legitimize it publically like this is just not right.

BARACK O BAMA DOESN'T CARE ABOUT WHITE PEOPLE

I've said similar already, but I'll say again and add something.
Coke can do whatever they want with their money, if they want to award a second 1k scholarship-fine.
The revolting part is the 'white-washing' of all pictures of the Taus. Not one picture on the site, but plenty of the other 1st place team, including celebratory vids.

To those who are making the drivel arguments that this is OK because of crap that happened days, months, years or centuries ago. I give you:

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Dr. King

reply to post by ImaNutter

Ahhhhh once again the liberal race baiting retards need a TRUE LESSON IN HISTORY

OK lets start ....one step at a time children

In 1807 Britain outlawed slavery. In 1820 the king of the African kingdom of Ashanti inquired why the Christians did not want to trade slaves with him anymore, since they worshiped the same god as the Muslims and the Muslims were continuing the trade like before.

The civil rights movement of the 1960's have left many people with the belief that the slave trade was exclusively a European/USA phenomenon and only evil white people were to blame for it. This is a simplistic scenario that hardly reflects the facts.
Thousands of records of transactions are available on a CDROM prepared by Harvard University and several comprehensive books have been published recently on the origins of modern slavery (namely, Hugh Thomas' The Slave Trade and Robin Blackburn's The Making Of New World Slavery) that shed new light on centuries of slave trading.
What these records show is that the modern slave trade flourished in the early middle ages, as early as 869, especially between Muslim traders and western African kingdoms. For moralists, the most important aspect of that trade should be that Muslims were selling goods to the African kingdoms and the African kingdoms were paying with their own people. In most instances, no violence was necessary to obtain those slaves. Contrary to legends and novels and Hollywood movies, the white traders did not need to savagely kill entire tribes in order to exact their tribute in slaves. All they needed to do is bring goods that appealed to the kings of those tribes. The kings would gladly sell their own kins.
This explains why slavery became "black". Ancient slavery, e.g. under the Roman empire, would not discriminate: slaves were both white and black (so were Emperors and Popes). In the middle ages, all European countries outlawed slavery (of course, they retained countless "civilized" ways to enslave their citizens, but that's another story), whereas the African kingdoms happily continued in their trade. Therefore, only colored people could be slaves, and that is how the stereotype for African-American slavery was born. It was not based on an ancestral hatred of blacks by whites, but simply on the fact that blacks were the only ones selling slaves, and they were selling their own kins. (To be precise, Christians were also selling Muslim slaves captured in war, and Muslims were selling Christian slaves captured in war, but neither the Christians of Europe nor the Muslims of Africa and the Middle East were selling their own kins).
Then the Muslim trade of African slaves came to a stop when Arab domination was reduced by the Crusades. (Note: Arabs continued to capture and sell slaves, but only in the Mediterranean. In fact, Robert Davis estimates that 1.25 million European Christians were enslaved by the "barbary states" of northern Africa. The USA bombed Morocco, Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli in 1801 precisely to stop that Arab slave trade of Christians. The rate of mortality of those Christian slaves in the Islamic world was roughly the same as the mortality rate in the Atlantic slave trade of the same period.)
Christians took over in black Africa, though. The first ones were the Portuguese, who, applying an idea that originally developed in Italian seatrading cities, and often using Italian venture capital, started exploiting sub-Saharan slaves in the 1440s to support the economy of the sugar plantations (mainly for their own African colonies of Sao Tome and Madeira).
The Dutch were the first, apparently, to import black slaves into North America, but black slaves had already been employed all over the world, including South and Central America. We tend to focus on what happened in North America because the United States would eventually fight a war over slavery (and it's in the U.S. that large sectors of the population would start condemning slavery, contrary to the indifference that Muslims and most Europeans showed for it).
Even after Europeans began transporting black slaves to America, most trade was just that: "trade". In most instances, the Europeans did not need to use any force to get those slaves. The slaves were "sold" more or less legally by their (black) owners. Scholars estimate that about 12,000,000 Africans were sold by Africans to Europeans (most of them before 1776, when the USA wasn't yet born) and 17,000,000 were sold to Arabs. The legends of European mercenaries capturing free people in the jungle are mostly just that: legends. A few mercenaries certainly stormed peaceful tribes and committed terrible crimes, but that was not the rule. There was no need to risk their lives, so most of them didn't: they simply purchased people.
As an African-American scholar (Nathan Huggins) has written, the "identity" of black Africans is largely a white invention: sub-Saharan Africans never felt like they were one people, they felt (and still feel) that they belonged to different tribes. The distinctions of tribe were far stronger than the distinctions of race.

SEE NOW WASN'T THAT EASY ,i DO NOT owe ANYONE # UNDERSTAND YOU LIBERAL BALL LICKIN DEM RETARDS.....
YOU LIB ASSWIPES ARE REALLY PATHETIC...WHY DON'T YOU GET THE HELL OUT OF THE COUNTRY YOU HATE AND GO TEACH BLACKS TO STOP KILLING EACH OTHER AND MUSLIMS WHO STILL SUPPORT SLAVERY AND LIVE IN HARMONY OK...AND US CONSERVATIVE PATRIOTIC PEOPLE CAN GET ON WITH OUR LIVES...READ that little history lesson over and over and over again ok ....get it thru your thick skulls ,who is playing who.... s226
deaconfrost
User ID: 899001
2/23/2010 9:01 PM
Re: Least's be honest: 99% of Obama hate is racist in nature! Quote

HERE KEEP READING SORRY I SEPARATED IT BUT YOU CAN HANDLE THE TRUTH RIGHT

Everything else is true: millions of slaves died on ships and of diseases, millions of blacks worked for free to allow the Western economies to prosper, and the economic interests in slavery became so strong that the southern states of the United States opposed repealing it. But those millions of slaves were just one of the many instances of mass exploitation: the industrial revolution was exported to the USA by enterpreuners exploiting millions of poor immigrants from Europe. The fate of those immigrants was not much better than the fate of the slaves in the South. As a matter of fact, many slaves enjoyed far better living conditions in the southern plantations than European immigrants in the industrial cities (which were sometimes comparable to concentration camps). It is not a coincidence that slavery was abolished at a time when millions of European and Chinese immigrants provided the same kind of cheap labor.
It is also fair to say that, while everybody tolerated it, very few whites practiced slavery: in 1860 there were 385,000 USA citizens who owned slaves, or about 1.4% of the white population (there were 27 million whites in the USA). That percentage was zero in the states that did not allow slavery (only 8 million of the 27 million whites lived in states that allowed slavery). Incidentally, in 1830 about 25% of the free Negro slave masters in South Carolina owned 10 or more slaves: that is a much higher percentage (ten times more) than the number of white slave owners. Thus slave owners were a tiny minority (1.4%) and it was not only whites: it was just about anybody who could, including blacks themselves.
Moral opposition to slavery was widespread even before Lincoln, and throughout Europe. On the other hand, opposition to slavery was never particularly strong in Africa itself, where slavery is slowly being eradicated only in our time. One can suspect that slavery would have remained common in most African kingdoms until this day: what crushed slavery in Africa was that all those African kingdoms became colonies of western European countries that (for one reason or another) eventually decided to outlaw slavery. When, in the 1960s, those African colonies regained their independence, numerous cases of slavery resurfaced. And countless African dictators behaved in a way that makes a slave owner look like a saint. Given the evidence that this kind of slavery was practiced by some Africans before it was practiced by some Americans, that it was abolished by all whites and not by some Africans, and that some Africans resumed it the moment they could, why would one keep blaming the USA but never blame, say, Ghana or the Congo?
The more we study it, the less blame we have to put on the USA for the slave trade with black Africa: it was pioneered by the Arabs, its economic mechanism was invented by the Italians and the Portuguese, it was mostly run by western Europeans, and it was conducted with the full cooperation of many African kings. The USA fostered free criticism of the phenomenon: no such criticism was allowed in the Muslim and Christian nations that started trading goods for slaves, and no such criticism was allowed in the African nations that started selling their own people (and, even today, no such criticism is allowed within the Arab world).
Today it is politically correct to blame some European empires and the USA for slavery (forgetting that it was practiced by everybody since prehistoric times). But I rarely read the other side of the story: that the nations who were the first to develop a repulsion for slavery and eventually abolish slavery were precisely those countries (especially Britain and the USA). As Dinesh D'Souza wrote, "What is uniquely Western is not slavery but the movement to abolish slavery".

(To be completely fair, what was also unique about the western slave trade is the scale (the millions shipped to another continent in a relatively short period of time), and, of course, that it eventually became a racist affair, discriminating blacks, whereas previous slave trades had not discriminated based on the color of the skin. What is unique about the USA, in particular, is the treatment that blacks received AFTER emancipation, which is, after all, the real source of the whole controversy, because, otherwise, just about everybody on this planet could claim to be the descendant of an ancient slave).
(That does not mean that western slave traders were justified in what they did, but placing all the blame on them is a way to absolve all the others).
To this day, too many Africans, Arabs and Europeans believe that the African slave trade was an USA aberration, not their own invention.

By the time the slave trade was abolished in the West, there were many more slaves in Africa (black slaves of black owners) than in the Americas. 5

Ok so I am sure you have had enough time reading and learning some real facts of history so when YOUR BOY OBAMA decides to have checks cut for reparations make sure you sign it write back to my white ass and go get your REAL REPARATIONS from your Homeys in the land of Ebony.....where you know THEY COMMIT 100 000 genocide every other month.....wow what a loving and caring people....tribalism in America isn't it great.....I do not want to ever hear # from any of you boneheaded liberal morons or black whiny ass "you owe me" LOSERS ABOUT # ANYMORE OK.....TAKE YOUR BS ABOUT REPARATIONS AND WHITE PEOPLE ARE THE ONLY ONES WHO ARE RACIST ,LMFAO..........FU AND THE CAMEL AND THE BOAT YOU RODE IN ON....you know I think it's hilarious this asswipe Obama learns all his garbage from his militant white hating RACIST FATHER....but that's ok....because they are so righteous LMFAO....

HMMMMM you know black Africans have done so well creating a Unified country of their own why wouldn't he want to Have A TEACHABLE MOMENT WITH HIS SON....make the U.S like Africa....100 000 genocide every other month.pop out kids that you don't want to educate or take care....WOW it occurred to me I don't see Africa making a UNITED STATES OF AFRICA...oh that's right they are to busy slaughtering each other and selling their own family's out.....1000 yrs and can't get # done but some white Europeans come here and in 200 make he GREATEST NATION ON EARTH AND HAVE TO TEACH ALL THESE OTHER RACES TO GET ALONG AND STOP KILLING EACH OTHER LMFAO.......

reply to post by ImaNutter


We all started out tribal. No exceptions. So all of our roots are in tribalism. So I would say that we all know quite a bit.

This is ridiculous. It harms everybody. People of both genders and all races have and will contribute to the human experience. One of the best ways to contribute is to have faith in oneself and one's view of the world, albeit with the willingness to amend said structures in light of personal experience. As was already stated, perhaps non-whites should stay away from the advanced maths, as whites invented calculus. Perhaps whites should not have invented calculus, as the Arabs invented algebra. Perhaps non-blacks should stay away from any music with syncopation. Perhaps men should not nurture one bit, as this is womanly territory. Perhaps women should not systematically plan and lead, as these are a man's domain. We all live in a continuum of multifaceted and interconnected influence. If none of us learned from others, we would be motionless, dead, and zombie-like. We live in a culture that, ironically, reinforces people's tunnel realities while simultaneously expressing an enlightened, holistic perspective. But some of you will know that a holistic perspective is several steps up from, and is hindered by, this relentless retreat to territorialism. Come on, I know that we are better than poo-slinging monkeys, if only we believe and ignore our merely angular visions. Peace.

reply to post by Hadrian



I am white.

And I am almost certainly descended from sex slaves.

[edit on 2010/2/27 by Aeons]

Originally posted by ImaNutter
How many of you above me who have replied above me have a good understanding of what step is?

I'm a pure bred western European white boy, in a Fraternity, and knowing what I know about step... I agree with coca cola...

This is essentially white people wishing they were tribal Africans.

This is going to ruffle some feathers but oh well.. I don't understand why black sororities and fraternities can't have something that is uniquely theirs, derived from their heritage?

[edit on 26-2-2010 by ImaNutter]

Wow.... just wow.

First of all, if they wanted this to be blacks only, they should have put that on the entry form.

Second of all, you best be trollin. That is like saying why should we allow black people to become President of the United States. Every single President before was white, so why change it? How about saying that only white people should be allowed to play basketball, it was invented by a white man so according to your logic, we should keep it sacred to only whites, as a part of our heritage.

You are completely stupid.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


Coca-Cola's Step contest shows up the deeper fears and hopes in America and boy doesit go deep.


Thanks for realising that the real issue that came out of american slavery was white supremacy. Sadly white suprecist views are still around and are even here on ATS. White supremacists views are clashing with black nationalist view but neither parter seems to realise that they are mirror images of each other. What I did not realise is how strongly the entire issue of race burns deep in the American psyche. The big problem is one of segregation which is greater now than it was during slavery in the south in many cases.

Obama must be a terrifying force for a section of white society. The idea that obama would give reparations to black people for slavery is both unfeasible to implement and also an invitation for idiots like Farakan, Jackson and Sharpton to line their pockets. But these three individuals are do not represent the black american population. If anyone did the maths looking at the ratio of blackpeople to white it is clear that Obama may be mad (to some but is not crazy) in short if he did so he would have alienated his non-black voters and doomed his party for a generation at least.

Obama is riding a hungry and paranoid tiger and may very wellend up being the nowhereamn.

I think what scare me is that I came to ATS as I felt it would be a place for those who believed that there were conspiracies that should be discussed.

Originally posted by harrytuttle

Originally posted by ImaNutter
To compete in step, you would be competing in a competition of African rhythm and rituals.

What the bloody bell do white people know about African tribalism???

Ummm... you did see the Karate Kid, right?

Italian kid learns how to compete in a competition of Japanese fighting and rituals, AND WINS.

Besides, what the hell would modern American black kids know about "African" rhythm and rituals", any more than American white kids?

You think they send these black kids to Africa for deep study of that stuff? NOPE. They learn how to dance IN THE SAME SCHOOLS and CLUBS these white kids learn to dance in.

[edit on 26-2-2010 by harrytuttle]

You guys are idiots or completely lost.



A people without identity is the worst thing you can have, so please leave them alone and let the African Americans have something to be proud of without you whites owning it.

See here in New Zealand the Maoris lost their culture due to White people, and its neighbour Australia, it's aborigines also lost their culture due to white people.

Now I dare all those who call ImaaNutter a troll to analyse these people who have lost their culture because of those white racist bigots, analyse them and compare them with each other, see what is wrong with people without identities.

Black people in the US are just trying to find their identity because without it they would be lost, so leave them alone. White people already have theirs.

Once again analyse the lifestyle of those people who have lost their culture, I already gave you three examples:

African Americans
Australian Aborigines
Maori

Originally posted by Esau Must Die

Originally posted by hadriana

hahahaha

And how DARE I forget that only Africans and Native Americans were ever TRIBAL CULTURES. There were never any tribes in Europe, only clans.

Oh no, wait....that didn't come out right.

(For anyone that doesn't GET that...Celts were tribal, picts, Scottish clans are tribal like as well, ect., ect,.)

Hate to break it to you, but the original Celts and Scotts were black, white people just have a thing for steeling history.
Jesus wasn't the only thing they painted white.

Anyways, why are white people crying over this ?
400 years of slavery and genocide not good.
White people already rule the world.

look it up...

one heritage that the black community can have all to them selves:

slavery.

blacks sold enemy tribe blacks to european traders

Originally posted by oozyism

Originally posted by harrytuttle

Originally posted by ImaNutter
To compete in step, you would be competing in a competition of African rhythm and rituals.

What the bloody bell do white people know about African tribalism???

Ummm... you did see the Karate Kid, right?

Italian kid learns how to compete in a competition of Japanese fighting and rituals, AND WINS.

Besides, what the hell would modern American black kids know about "African" rhythm and rituals", any more than American white kids?

You think they send these black kids to Africa for deep study of that stuff? NOPE. They learn how to dance IN THE SAME SCHOOLS and CLUBS these white kids learn to dance in.

[edit on 26-2-2010 by harrytuttle]

You guys are idiots or completely lost.



A people without identity is the worst thing you can have, so please leave them alone and let the African Americans have something to be proud of without you whites owning it.

See here in New Zealand the Maoris lost their culture due to White people, and its neighbour Australia, it's aborigines also lost their culture due to white people.

Now I dare all those who call ImaaNutter a troll to analyse these people who have lost their culture because of those white racist bigots, analyse them and compare them with each other, see what is wrong with people without identities.

Black people in the US are just trying to find their identity because without it they would be lost, so leave them alone. White people already have theirs.

Once again analyse the lifestyle of those people who have lost their culture, I already gave you three examples:

African Americans
Australian Aborigines
Maori

Black people in America aren't Aborigines. They may or may not be of slave descent and a step competition in it's first year of existence under a corporate sponsorship isn't deep-rooted in African African culture or African. Do you really think Coca-Cola is interested in preserving anything other than their bottom-line?

reply to post by oozyism


White people do not have background OR identity in the New World.

"White" is not some all encompassing thing.

Danes aren't Romanians. Spaniards are not Scots. Irish aren't French.

The one thing "whites" in the New World absolutely DO NOT have is identity. What they do have is a band-aid of songs and flags superimposed by the government who is and has been desperately trying to cobble together something that spans cultures that have thousands of years of animosity into something that won't blow the # up.

"White" isn't a culture. IT HAS NEVER BEEN A CULTURE. Ever. Not in ALL of history has "white" been ANY culture.

It isn't even a RACE.

Its a DESCRIPTION BY COMPARISON of a meaningless melanin variation.



[edit on 2010/2/27 by Aeons]

slavery and reparations has nothing to do with cokes stance; so if slavery or reparations does occur it is not included with or has no associations with either.

if non black people understood their exile and being slavs they would not use the term they do for the mistreatment of anything similar to their native kingdom;slavery.since this mistreatment is now accepted as slavery then slavs and exiles should be treated as such in like manner.and should be repaired after they brake; if reparations does occur.

There still seems to be a lot of confusion on this thread about the origins of step and how they relate to African tribalism and the African American's African heritage.

Stepping origins are in US military parade drill and are heavily influence by the dance routines of R&B groups like The Four Tops and from probate shows in the 1970's.

Black American's have added traditional African influence to stepping but that is no different to adding traditional Japanese influence to a ballet routine.

I do agree, however, that stepping is a Black American cultural tradition. But it is stupid to think that it should remain exclusively black.

I always thought that dance would break down barriers and united people.

How ironic that those who fought for so long to throw off the shackles of segregation now, it seems, seek to use it for their own gain.

Here is an excellent quote from the author Lawrence C. Ross Jr:

The problem with the arguments presented by the critics is that they tend to gloss over the question of whether the Zeta Tau Alpha steppers were actually better than their competition. Instead, most of the criticism has been reactionary and sought to deny Zeta Tau Alpha the opportunity to compete based solely on their skin color.

By doing that, black Greeks do a disservice to our historic legacy. African-American fraternities and sororities were born in circumstances that sought to combat judgments based on race. And to do the same as those who would deny us opportunity, based on the notion that we’re somehow protecting our black cultural integrity, is morally bankrupt.

Source

reply to post by Aeons


This is quite true. White culture has been corporate for the longest of times. It sort of mixes passionate competition with rules and some sort of shifting hierarchical ideal that maintains the collective. There is little identity in this. Only game. Every individual must struggle for identity, and it does not come from without. Although external experiences do provide context, to be sure. The vast majority of people, and I have been certainly guilty of such, mindlessly repeat a territorial ideology when it comes to matters such as this. It is very much a lower circuit in our brains, the desire to wipe our feces over everything. Once we stop needing to have our image plastered over the world, and this goes for every people, we will be much better off, in my view at least.

Originally posted by Tiger5
Sadly white suprecist views are still around and are even here on ATS.

We will probably never completely get rid of that. There will always be people who feel so diminished in themselves that they need someone else to feel "better" than. Black and white. All colors actually, and all genders too.

Originally posted by Tiger5
White supremacists views are clashing with black nationalist view but neither parter seems to realise that they are mirror images of each other.

That is the tragedy of that kind of tit for tat strategy. "I hurt you, you hurt me and other like me, who all go one to hurt other like you....." It can cycle viciously forever.

Originally posted by Tiger5
What I did not realise is how strongly the entire issue of race burns deep in the American psyche. The big problem is one of segregation which is greater now than it was during slavery in the south in many cases.

True. Unfortunately, the self imposed segregation can only end when we stop viewing each other as teams, and start looking at one another individually. Ghetto behavior is not "black culture" and educated blacks need to stop pretending it is and tolerating it. Racist white trash behavior is not "white culture," and whites are doing pretty good about not accepting it, but we can certainly go further.

Although some of the race issues that have come up lately are indeed evidence that the issue of race still burns deep, as you say, I find some things encouraging. What I am hearing from most of the people here is not the same old hate filled rubbish on one side, and the same old victimized stuff on the other side.

I am hearing most whites saying. "If racism is wrong, and I am not to be racist, you cant be racist against me either. If discrimination is wrong, it is wrong for us all." Thats a far cry from some of the older crap. It isnt a call to go backwards, (ie, "Thats what happens when you give rights to _______.") It isnt a bottom line questioning of whether or not blacks deserve equality. It is a call for them to live up to their end of it. Same thing happened to the very angry feminists too. It just happened in really short order. The man hating session and its backlash went really quick. The white hating session has been dragging on a bit.

Originally posted by Tiger5
Obama must be a terrifying force for a section of white society. The idea that obama would give reparations to black people for slavery is both unfeasible to implement and also an invitation for idiots like Farakan, Jackson and Sharpton to line their pockets.

I dont think he is as terrifying as some would have us believe. He got MORE of the white Democratic vote than Kerry did. Sure, lots of whites didnt vote for him, but they were mostly Republican anyway. Thats not racism, thats politics. I bet if we had run Colin Powell, a lot of those conservative whites would have fallen all over themselves to make him the first black president. Condaleeza didnt get much crap at all from the right wing. I am not denying that there are hard core white supremacists who would hate any black anything. But there are the "exterminate the white scourge" crowd too. What are you going to do? Decent people should just alienate the nuts on both sides of the issue, and not let them pretend they speak for us all. We need to make it CLEAR they do not speak for us all.

Originally posted by Tiger5
I think what scare me is that I came to ATS as I felt it would be a place for those who believed that there were conspiracies that should be discussed.

It still is. You have to remember who clicks on the political posts. Or the posts about race. Or religion. YOU. (Or me too) There are plenty of pure conspiracy threads out there. We are clicking on the non conspiracy threads for some reason. I know for me its because I really am sick of racism. And discrimination based on things you cant control in general. I am not for giving up discrimination in general. I just think we should discriminate against jerks. No matter what color or gender they are.

I think a lot of the discussions here about the "dangerous" topics, race, gender, politics, and religion, do pretty well. Of course you get your trolls and your flamers. But you would get that anywhere.

reply to post by harrytuttle


I was on a competition rifle drill team in High school, our female counterpart team performed a lot of this slap/step stuff in competition. After watching both performances and knowing absolutely nothing about this dance sport I'll list a few things I noticed.

1. Both teams perform lifts, however the TZA team lifts a member on a platform so she can dance while they carry her. The TAU team launches their dancer and catches her.
2. The TZA team demonstrates a much higher level of movement discipline which reduces distractions from their overall routine. The TAU team seemed more concerned with shaking their hair out of their faces.
3. The TZA team showed far greater complexity in their slap and step movements than the TAU team.
4. The TZA team showed far more enthusiasm and spirit in thier performance than the TAU team.
5. I honestly do not understand how both of these performances can be called equal. One is obviously performing at a much much higher level than the other team.

BTW Germany has had slap step dances for centuries.

Edit to correct ZTA to TZA, I went to college with ZTAs and misread the story without realizing it. Additionally corrected to remove a comment regarding the length of the performance. Thanks for keeping me honest.

[edit on 27-2-2010 by Dark Oracle]

Originally posted by Ausar
slavery and reparations has nothing to do with cokes stance; so if slavery or reparations does occur it is not included with or has no associations with either.

if non black people understood their exile and being slavs they would not use the term they do for the mistreatment of anything similar to their native kingdom;slavery.since this mistreatment is now accepted as slavery then slavs and exiles should be treated as such in like manner.and should be repaired after they brake; if reparations does occur.

I agree that current events should maintain reparations from guilty parties. In this case however nobody is living who was either a slave in this era or perpetrator of slavery. There were thousands of white northerners who joined the civil war to end slavery-as with WWII, many joined after they heard of the atrocities etc..

However: this logic seems to be that the government should give reparations to people who were not born when the events occurred. The people were enslaved and sold to the west by their own people. Then as the culture changed, thousands died to stop it in the west, while the slavers in Africa kept the trade up.

This is boggling to me.

Under this logic I should be able to sue the Catholic church for destroying the culture of my ancestors in Europe. By this logic I should be able to sue in regards to the Salem Witch Trials as well, since I have distant relatives who were victims of that.

I am also sure I had relatives in Europe who were killed by the German bombing of Britain and/or in Germany.

According to this "Sins of the father" mentality and inherited debt, I should be a millionaire.

So, I was wondering: What is the distinction that you talk about in regards to reparations?