Systemic racism in the USA: Are whites "guiltier" if they had slavery in their past?

[J_B_]

How is this logical. Why is it that other races want to flock to what has always been seen as predominantly white civilizations/nations rather than the other way around. Isn't this a case of 'if you build it they will come'? Are not the builders always better off? And as far a slavery goes, find me a race that has never practiced it. What we have now is political and not practical.

Though not framed in exactly this way, this is a question that has haunted historians for a long time. Why do some groups succeed and others do not? The famous attempt to answer that question is Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel.

To some extent, political ideologies close people off to considering all the possibilities. Some topics are just too loaded to discuss calmly in a public setting. As such, I expect it will be one of those questions people churn over forever.

I accidentally stumbled into one such question while presenting a historical paper of my own, namely: Why are women under represented in STEM? It wasn't what I wanted to focus on, but once the subject was mentioned, it was all anyone would talk about.

 

[Larniavc]

My husband and I are both white. He and his family are currently, and generally, less religious and more progressive than mine, but his (historically) is MUCH more Southern and slave-owning than mine. In fact, all his family has Southern and slave-owning past, whereas mine doesn't on either paternal or maternal side.

My dad's family are all WASPs and Irish/Scottish from the upper northeast (Massachusetts, Vermont, etc.) who never held or owned slaves. My mom's are all Germans/Norwegians/Hutterites from the upper midwest (Minnesota, South Dakota, etc.) who came to the US in the 1800s and also never had slaves.

In recent years, I've noticed a change from individualistic and historical focus of racism, toward more 'systemic' focus. The idea is, it doesn't really matter that my husband's family was historically slave-owning, whereas mine were in regions where slavery never occurred. The focus now is, both nonetheless benefited from 'white privilege,' so it doesn't matter if one's white families had slaves or not. What matters now is, if they are allies, or at least voting Democrat in greater numbers. In that case, my husband's family is generally more progressive now, even if they have purely Southern and slave-owning roots.

Do you agree with that perspective: is it better to have a family that "currently" is overall more progressive and voting Democrat, even if that family is purely slave-owning and Southern in its past, than it is to come from a family with no slavery, even if that family is currently slightly more third-party or Republican in its voting?

I think what a person does themselves is more important than what our ancestors did.

 

[Larniavc]

The source of those black African slaves was other black Africans who captured them and sold them to whites.

And kept them in servitude when they could have done the decent thing and freed them.

 

[timothyu]

And kept them in servitude when they could have done the decent thing and freed them.

Apart from currently doing this to perhaps women and children, are they still doing this now? Who is?
And realistically yes I am responsible to a degree for what my children may do but certainly not for those that went before me.

 

[Bradskii]

I might note that if you go back just 20 generations then you will have over 2 million direct ancestors. You can guarantee that some of them were rapists and murderers.

 

[chilehed]

Do you agree with that perspective: is it better to have a family that "currently" is overall more progressive and voting Democrat, even if that family is purely slave-owning and Southern in its past, than it is to come from a family with no slavery, even if that family is currently slightly more third-party or Republican in its voting?

No, for at least two reasons. First, none of us bear responsibility for the sins of our forebears. Second, the Democrat party has always been, and is to this day, the party of bigotry, racism and divisiveness in the US.

 

[dqhall]

It was not my intent, but due to circumstances I studied a lot of black history during my history masters program. @dqhall may want to look into books like New England Bound that covers the history of slavery in New England and why it eventually disappeared. The Puritans and Separatists who settled there were not originally opposed to slavery, and so morality played only a small role in slavery's disappearance from the northern colonies. After the Civil War as blacks began migrating north, racism in the north was a fairly common thing. The difference was that the racism was not as strongly institutionalized as it was in the south. It was more an individual opinion.

With that said, the Quakers (and later the Congregationalists) did have a huge influence on the rise of abolitionism in the U.S. As such, there was a significant religious contribution to ending slavery in the U.S., and those who wag their fingers at Christians for being naughty misunderstand the complexity of the slavery issue and the role Christianity played in ending it just as much as those who want to think no 'true' Christians ever owned slaves.

[edit] FYI, I agree with others with respect to the OP that @Holy Athanasius had a very good post.

Harvard educated Henry David Thoreau lived in a one room shack in the woods near Walden Pond. There is a replica of his home in the Walden Pond State Reservation. Another famous writer named Ralph Waldo Emerson owned the woods around Walden Pond and let Thoreau stay there. There were some African Americans living in Concord forests. Thoreau met some of them. The abolitionist movement was active before the Civil War. Thoreau was against war to the point of not paying his taxes. Someone paid his debt for him to get him out of jail. The writers Ralph Waldo Emerson and Louisa May Alcott lived in Concord the same time as Thoreau and were also abolitionists desiring an end to slavery.

 

[essentialsaltes]

How is this logical. Why is it that other races want to flock to what has always been seen as predominantly white civilizations/nations

I don't think the ones manacled in the holds of ships were wanting to flock here.

Isn't this a case of 'if you build it they will come'? Are not the builders always better off?

What about "If you make someone else build it"? In that case, it is not the literal builders who are well off. It's the owners.

 

[Estrid]

(Ken)
Sounds like an absurd attempt to convince people that if they don’t vote democratic, they are racist. Sorta like I’ve heard some on the right claim if you don’t vote republican, you aren’t Christian.
As far as “white privilege”, In the US there is White privilege, Black privilege, Brown privilege, Male, female, tall, short, gay straight privileges as well; it doesn’t matter what or who you are, whatever it is about you that is unique, there will be times when it will work to your advantage, and times when it will work to your disadvantage. The problem is (and I know too many my people are guilty of this) when non-white people will point at white people and proclaim white privilege while ignoring their privilege, or not even noticing they even have privilege. As a black man, I would prefer my black privilege over your white privilege any day.

I won't trade my privilege either

I found out a few years ago that some family members on my mother's side owned slaves. The family history of that line is full of pretty nasty sadistic temperaments with stories of brutal treatment going back generations. Not to mention full of preachers which is a chilling sign in my opinion. Impossible to say but it wouldn't surprise me if my ancestors who owned slaves were extremely harsh slave owners.

If I learned this news several years ago the white guilt would have overwhelmed me. Now.. thanks to progressives I don't feel such guilt white anymore. I wouldn't have blamed the slaves if they killed some of my ancestors, lol. But I see no reason to feel guilty about it now.

There's centuries of slave holding in my
family. So what?

I might note that if you go back just 20 generations then you will have over 2 million direct ancestors. You can guarantee that some of them were rapists and murderers.

I had one of the world's greatest at those

 

[J_B_]

Harvard educated Henry David Thoreau lived in a one room shack in the woods near Walden Pond. There is a replica of his home in the Walden Pond State Reservation. Another famous writer named Ralph Waldo Emerson owned the woods around Walden Pond and let Thoreau stay there. There were some African Americans living in Concord forests. Thoreau met some of them. The abolitionist movement was active before the Civil War. Thoreau was against war to the point of not paying his taxes. Someone paid his debt for him to get him out of jail. The writers Ralph Waldo Emerson and Louisa May Alcott lived in Concord the same time as Thoreau and were also abolitionists desiring an end to slavery.

Yes, I know. Mark Twain also had a house in Concord; Alcott was his neighbor.

 

[timothyu]

I don't think the ones manacled in the holds of ships were wanting to flock here.

Slavery then was worldwide and not restricted to black oppression by whites. However that was then and not now. The point is why has one culture been overrun by those seeking a better life while at the same time today the builders of that culture are condemned?

 

[timothyu]

What about "If you make someone else build it"? In that case, it is not the literal builders who are well off. It's the owners.

Everyone wants what those 'owners' created, but don't want the owners recognized for what they created. Reminds me of the parable about the servants killing the son of the vineyard owner.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Slavery then was worldwide and not restricted to black oppression by whites.

Sure, plenty of countries have history they have to contemplate, and legacies they should address.

The point is why has one culture been overrun

That is not a true reflection of the situation.

at the same time today the builders of that culture are condemned?

That is not a true reflection of the situation.

 

[timothyu]

Sure, plenty of countries have history they have to contemplate, and legacies they should address.

That could apply as far back as the stone age but the difference is it may not be politically beneficial.

 

[timothyu]

That is not a true reflection of the situation.

That is not a true reflection of the situation.

How so?

 

[J_B_]

Everyone wants what those 'owners' created, but don't want the owners recognized for what they created. Reminds me of the parable about the servants killing the son of the vineyard owner.

It's not a simple situation. There is some truth in what you say. TR, famous for his trust busting of the robber barons was also concerned about the jealousy the poor have for the rich. It's well expressed in American Pastoral, where a daughter is berating her father during the Vietnam War for being an Imperialist Pig. The father rhetorically asks his daughter: What do the Vietnamese want? They want safety and prosperity for their children. In other words, they want what I have. So why is what I have wrong?

Yet on the flip side, Caucasian Americans didn't achieve their success exclusively by their own hands. Northern textile mills got rich processing cotton picked by slaves. etc. etc. Whether it was Dr. John Emerson enslaving Dred Scott or Andrew Carnegie denying workers' rights in his steel mills or Hollywood exploiting CGI creators, wealth has often come from the blood, sweat, and tears of oppressed people.

 

[timothyu]

The father rhetorically asks his daughter: What do the Vietnamese want? They want safety and prosperity for their children. In other words, they want what I have. So why is what I have wrong?

Yet ironically they have.

Yet on the flip side, Caucasian Americans didn't achieve their success exclusively by their own hands.

What great civilizations ever did?

 

[Lukaris]

Generations have passed in America and many of us have rather mixed ancestry. Paternally my Arabic Christian ancestors emigrated from oppression and my maternal American colonist ancestor was an indentured servant. While I am no socioeconomic or virtuous accomplishment, I am thankful for what I have. I would think a person coming out of a broken home or immediate harm is one less privileged but such matters are a regrettable part of this fallen world.

 

[MehGuy]

There's centuries of slave holding in my
family. So what?

I'm not sure what you are? Chinese? In America having slave owning ancestors is a sensitive topic for many. There is an actor in America named Ben Affleck. He was one on those ancestry shows, and they discovered some of his ancestors were slave owners, turns out he tried to pressure the producers in editing that section of the program out. It's kind of a weak move... but in many ways, I understand his motivation. Especially him being among the Hollywood crowd.

 

[timothyu]

I'm not sure what you are? Chinese? In America having slave owning ancestors is a sensitive topic for many. There is an actor in America named Ben Affleck. He was one on those ancestry shows, and they discovered some of his ancestors were slave owners, turns out he tried to pressure the producers in editing that section of the program out. It's kind of a weak move... but in many ways, I understand his motivation. Especially him being among the Hollywood crowd.

Perhaps if America returned to common sense rather than emotional blackmail, the situations might better resolve themselves. It seems people are going at this as if it were some sort of court case and the object was to achieve some sort of remuneration. Apologies on behalf of those people who have no connection to nor emulate the original people involved, do not seem to have worked.