There was a lot of immigration to the US after say 1880 when owning slaves or the genocide of the Natives certainly wasn’t a motivation. Also for example Irish immigrants didn’t become plantation owners and mostly settled in the cities along the East coast. Undoubtedly the US has a troubled history but many immigrants came there for reasons no more pernicious than escaping poverty or persecution.
100% accurate. Here’s a depressing book to read if you really want to drive it home:
https://www.amazon.com/American-Settler-Colonialism-W-Hixson/dp/113737425X
It’s still all handed-down blood money though.
I appreciate you sharing this. Another along the same lines is this one by historian Gerald Horne, The Apocalypse of Settler Colonialism: The Roots of Slavery, White Supremacy, and Capitalism in 17th Century North America and the Caribbean:
https://www.amazon.com/Apocalypse-Settler-Colonialism-Supremacy-Capitalism/dp/1583676635
I started reading that one too - but I found it a lot more bombastic and clearly biased in its POV than the one I posted. Which is fine, I’m sure it’s accurate and this is a subject you should be biased and emotional about. But I felt like I got depressed enough from the first book and got the gist of things.
I want to maybe do a whole book on the Caribbean diaspora some day. I think it’s completely fascinating and there are so many tragic stories worth telling. If/when I do I’ll definitely go back and read that.
Hell, sign me up for this place right now
4 Likes
Prof. Horne is prolific in his research and writings, and if you or anyone were to do a book on Caribbean diaspora his works would be invaluable resources.
(Not picking a fight, just curious)What did you feel was bombastic or biased about his book?
Obviously, every writer will have a bias or lens to view events through. I share Horne’s critical perspective of capitalism, so I feel like he’s writing with more clarity and incisiveness than the average historian.
You are correct that I definitely oversimplified things there. Those people did still benefit from a land built upon the backs of slavery and genocide. It doesn’t make them responsible for it, but it is who we are as a country.
1 Like
I guess it was passages like these:
I don’t disagree with any of this stuff. But after reading the other book I wasn’t really in the mood for an even stronger diatribe against all things colonial/bourgeoise. It felt like watching MSNBC, having my choir preached to.
Yeah maybe I also don’t 100% share the attack on capitalism, while acknowledging that unfettered capitalism is a human rights disaster. You know my position - I just want to emulate whatever Scandanavia is doing right now. So maybe that turned me off some too.
But browsing around the book - maybe he just saves this kind of rhetoric for the introduction? Some of the other chapters seem more like the book I posted. I will definitely pick it up again at some point.
1 Like
You mean the thing that’s explicitly unconstitutional and should never have even been attempted? Oh good. Another freeroll for Republicans with no punishment or accountability.
1 Like
That seems like a big deal.
2 Likes
If Biden/Harris win, and they appoint Feinstein as ambassador to Luxembourg or whatever, That would mean we’d have to hold a special election in CA at the same time the governor appoints someone else for a seat.
crazy.
The appointment would be someone from state government, who that is depends on who Biden taps for his admin. Xavier Becerra, Lorena Gonzales, Toni Atkins, or even Eric Garcetti have to be frontrunners. Possibly London Breed.
All in for Feinstein getting an ambassadorship to whatever country she wants. I mean this has to be her play…right…right? Yeah I know narrator.
It would be a legitimate way for the DNC to make a deal with Biden to get her out of Senatorial leadership. Depends on Biden’s willingness to push for senate reforms.
No one here is unaware of how bad all of our Presidents have been.
This.
Obama was far from perfect but lets put things in perspective and rank him in comparison to past presidents. My knowledge of history most likely pales in comparison to most on this board so the farthest back I will go is Reagan. Others should feel free to go back farther if they want.
Obama > Clinton > HW Bush > W Bush > Reagan > Trump
2 Likes
That Atlantic article is worth a read.