The Cellar
Page 43 of 52 « First 3336373839404142 43 44454647484950 Last »
Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)
-   Home Base (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Do You Own a Gun? (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=13960)

piercehawkeye45 05-31-2007 06:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint (Post 349159)
Not true. Another popular fabrication used to rationalize European conquest. We keep repeating it because we "learned" it in "history" class.
Sorry, I was refering more towardsthe Plain Indian groups that did tend to live a life free of owning property. I also realize that the Plain Indians did live a life of agriculture but stopped when the settlers from Europe came and brought them horses.

xoxoxoBruce 05-31-2007 08:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint (Post 349159)
Not true. Another popular fabrication used to rationalize European conquest. We keep repeating it because we "learned" it in "history" class.
Tribes or sub-groups controlled territories, I've never heard of any tribe claiming to own land and certainly not individual Indians.
Maybe our resident expert can clarify.

glatt 06-01-2007 08:08 AM
1 Attachment(s)
Well, he did say North America. (in his "this is my America thread") I suppose that included the Aztec cities. Is that what you are talking about Flint?

piercehawkeye45 06-01-2007 08:18 AM
The Hohokam of the American Southwest had personal property.

xoxoxoBruce 06-01-2007 01:52 PM
I don't see any reference in that link that indicates any personal property.
It does say, however....
Quote:
Designating culture groups, such as the Hohokam, tends to create an image of group territories separated by clear-cut boundaries, like modern nation states. These simply did not exist. Prehistoric people traded, worshiped and collaborated most often with other nearby groups. Cultural differences should therefore be understood as “clinal,” "increasing gradually as the distance separating groups also increases."

rkzenrage 06-01-2007 03:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45 (Post 349330)
Sorry, I was refering more towardsthe Plain Indian groups that did tend to live a life free of owning property. I also realize that the Plain Indians did live a life of agriculture but stopped when the settlers from Europe came and brought them horses.
They also spent a lot of time killing their neighbors.
Communism and socialism have been used to enable the ruling classes to practice some of the worst and most complete genocides in history... the first step of each being to disarm the public.
Native Americans, however are completely OT to this conversation.

xoxoxoBruce 06-01-2007 03:32 PM
Pierce, read the Lakota Winter Counts.

piercehawkeye45 06-01-2007 06:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 349703)
I don't see any reference in that link that indicates any personal property.
It does say, however....
"Settlements in the Hohokam tradition were rancheria-style; near arable land, with several buildings clustered together. Each large, square house had slightly excavated floors and was usually no more than one room until very late in the Hohokam sequence."
I don't know how personal it was but it is pretty close.

Quote:
Pierce, read the Lakota Winter Counts.
If I can't get to it tonight I'll try to read it in the next few days, I don't know how long it is.

Quote:
Communism and socialism have been used to enable the ruling classes to practice some of the worst and most complete genocides in history... the first step of each being to disarm the public.
What? Capitalism has caused much worse genocides than communism or socialism. The African genocide was a direct result of capitalism and that killed an estimated 12-100 million depending on sources and raped them of their culture. Then the Native American genocide was more just white supremacy but capitalism plays a part in it as well.

Any authoritarian state can do what you said, Hitler was in no way a socialist or a communist. Stalin did it as well. What do they have in common? Authoritarian state.

Radar 06-01-2007 07:23 PM
There has never, ever, ever, ever been a genocide that has resulted from capitalism. Capitalism has never failed and prevents violence, but never causes it. Some stupidly would point to the great depression and accuse capitalism of failing, but it was the exact opposite. It was government intervention on free markets and the money supply that led to the depression.

Pure, unregulated, unhampered, free-market capitalism means nobody is ever forced into any transaction, and nobody has their livelihood or goods stolen from them by government or others. It ensures that all parties involved in every transaction are trading peacefully.

The worst genocides (worse than Hitler's genocide of Jews) occurred in communist China and communist Russia.

Capitalism had nothing to do with the single death of a single person in all of recorded history.

For the record, communists and fascists are equally authoritarian.

rkzenrage 06-01-2007 07:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45 (Post 349843)
"Settlements in the Hohokam tradition were rancheria-style; near arable land, with several buildings clustered together. Each large, square house had slightly excavated floors and was usually no more than one room until very late in the Hohokam sequence."
I don't know how personal it was but it is pretty close.


If I can't get to it tonight I'll try to read it in the next few days, I don't know how long it is.


What? Capitalism has caused much worse genocides than communism or socialism. The African genocide was a direct result of capitalism and that killed an estimated 12-100 million depending on sources and raped them of their culture. Then the Native American genocide was more just white supremacy but capitalism plays a part in it as well.

Any authoritarian state can do what you said, Hitler was in no way a socialist or a communist. Stalin did it as well. What do they have in common? Authoritarian state.
LMAO... what the fuck is "The African Genocide"? Who said "Let's kill all tha' Africans?" OMG! Talk about ambition!
What was Hitler's party called again? You must have done really well in history... LOL!!!

bluecuracao 06-01-2007 07:47 PM
Oh christ, I knew there was a reason I've been avoiding this thread.

piercehawkeye45 06-01-2007 07:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radar (Post 349852)
There has never, ever, ever, ever been a genocide that has resulted from capitalism. Capitalism has never failed and prevents violence, but never causes it. Some stupidly would point to the great depression and accuse capitalism of failing, but it was the exact opposite. It was government intervention on free markets and the money supply that led to the depression.
The slave trade could easily be considered a genocide in many senses and that is a direct result of capitalism. The estimated deaths are from 12 million to 100 million depending on the sources you use (realistically 16-20 million).

Quote:
According to David Stannard's American Holocaust, 50% of African deaths occurred in Africa as a result of wars between native kingdoms, which produced the majority of slaves.[14] This includes not only those who died in battles, but also those who died as a result of forced marches from inland areas to slave ports on the various coasts.[15] The practice of enslaving enemy combatants and their villages was widespread throughout Western and West Central Africa, although wars were rarely started to procure slaves. The slave trade was largely a by-product of tribal and state warfare as a way of removing potential dissidents after victory or financing future wars.[16] However, some African groups proved particularly adept and brutal at the practice of enslaving such as Kaabu, Asanteman, Dahomey, the Aro Confederacy and the Imbangala war bands.[17] By the end of this process, no less than 18.3 million people would be herded into "factories" to await shipment to the New World.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanti...ade#Human_toll

TheMercenary 06-01-2007 08:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45 (Post 349865)
The slave trade could easily be considered a genocide in many senses and that is a direct result of capitalism. The estimated deaths are from 12 million to 100 million depending on the sources you use (realistically 16-20 million).



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanti...ade#Human_toll
You mean all those slaves sold to the whites by the black slave traders?

piercehawkeye45 06-01-2007 08:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkzenrage (Post 349856)
LMAO... what the fuck is "The African Genocide"? Who said "Let's kill all tha' Africans?" OMG! Talk about ambition!
Our ancestors...

Quote:
What was Hitler's party called again? You must have done really well in history... LOL!!!
The Nazi party was refered to as National Socialist German Worker Party.

Yet, while it had the label of a socialist party it has much to do with socialism as China has to do with a Republic.

Nationalism and Socialism in a sense can be related but to call Hilter a socialist is foolish, he did it for the state, not the people.

Hilter was more right winged than left winged.
http://politicalcompass.org/analysis2

Hilter may have considered himself somewhat anti-capitalist but that brings up the question of why he was doing business with American corporations. American capitalism funded the rise of Hitler's war machine.

http://www.historycooperative.org/jo...1/pauwels.html

Happy Monkey 06-01-2007 08:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 349877)
You mean all those slaves sold to the whites by the black slave traders?
And in Germany, all those whites killing whites! It can't be genocide!


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:14 AM.
Page 43 of 52 « First 3336373839404142 43 44454647484950 Last »
Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.