Where the fuck are these people?

[Huggy Bear]

You seriously going to complain about context while you have a whole slew of out of context quotes in your sig?

There is no context where chattel slavery is ok, period.

Yep, it sounds extra greasy, go ahead and explain the context...

I explained the context last time but it went over your head. 

I'm telling you that in both situations there was no controversy in what I was saying.  But because I don't think you'll be able to comprehend it would be a waste of time to explain to you.
The second example is more complex than the first, so if you can't understand the first you wouldn't understand the second.

As for your position on owning slaves, after it was pointed out that your context was bs, you backpedaled hard, why did you backpedal if there was no controversy? Go ahead and challenge me on that if you want, I have no problems pulling receipts.

As for "cops are justified in beating up black people.", I'm trying to legitimately give you a chance to explain yourself, so again provide the context you're speaking of.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Paul, I've got no reason at all to think RobertE would lie about that. And her not disputing a public charge like that is telling.

And when I confronted her with his words, she once again didn't dispute what he said. Now, you're obviously going to draw your own conclusion about the matter, but I'm pretty sure of where I stand here ... and I'll be happy to consider whatever you have to say on it once you get beyond a what-if.

[paulpablo]

I explained the context last time but it went over your head. 

I'm telling you that in both situations there was no controversy in what I was saying.  But because I don't think you'll be able to comprehend it would be a waste of time to explain to you.
The second example is more complex than the first, so if you can't understand the first you wouldn't understand the second.

As for your position on owning slaves, after it was pointed out that your context was bs, you backpedaled hard, why did you backpedal if there was no controversy? Go ahead and challenge me on that if you want, I have no problems pulling receipts.

As for "cops are justified in beating up black people.", I'm trying to legitimately give you a chance to explain yourself, so again provide the context you're speaking of.

All I can see is you saying you didn't understand then, you don't understand now, and you definitely won't understand anything from this point onwards.

You're not even on the radar huggy.

A fun fact is that thump is giving you kudos now for saying that what I said about slavery was bullshit but actually gave me kudos at the time for my explanation about context.  Think what you want about that.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'm giving him kudos for him serving up a dose of your own medicine.

Rather than impute motives, perhaps you should ask.

[paulpablo]

Paul, I've got no reason at all to think RobertE would lie about that. And her not disputing a public charge like that is telling.

And when I confronted her with his words, she once again didn't dispute what he said. Now, you're obviously going to draw your own conclusion about the matter, but I'm pretty sure of where I stand here ... and I'll be happy to consider whatever you have to say on it once you get beyond a what-if.

I think that Bella might have supported the BNP, RobertE said she did.  To be fair Bella didn't back up or dispute any claims at the time but did say something about a misunderstanding and then on something Huggy just posted then she also did actually dispute supporting the BNP.

My only point being is that I don't see conclusively that Bella did send anything to RobertE apart from his word for it.  And to put it politely he seemed like a pretty confused individual.

Honestly I don't give a fuck about the issue, it's a case of a right wing person saying she doesn't support this one rightwing group and another guy who seemed pretty fucked in the head saying she sent him a message in private about it.

My only minute issue was the word conclusive.  I don't think anything's been conclusive.

[Huggy Bear]

As for your position on owning slaves, after it was pointed out that your context was bs, you backpedaled hard, why did you backpedal if there was no controversy? Go ahead and challenge me on that if you want, I have no problems pulling receipts.

As for "cops are justified in beating up black people.", I'm trying to legitimately give you a chance to explain yourself, so again provide the context you're speaking of.

All I can see is you saying you didn't understand then, you don't understand now, and you definitely won't understand anything from this point onwards.

You're not even on the radar huggy.

A fun fact is that thump is giving you kudos now for saying that what I said about slavery was bullshit but actually gave me kudos at the time for my explanation about context.  Think what you want about that.

Fine I'll provide the context for the one about slavery, I keep asking you to put the other in context (since I don't remember you making that statement) and you refuse.

I think this is one topic you're likely to get a lot of dishonest answers about, also I think it's a question that depends a lot on the circumstances anyway you look at it.
If I was in a situation where I was part of a huge rich family who made money from having slaves who were black I doubt I'd give up my vast fortune, large house, secure family and farm and whatever else just because I feel sorry for a few black people, and I am a person with a lot of empathy in comparison with people I know, but I imagine in a world full of unfairness, poverty and death a few slaves wouldn't weigh heavy on my guilt, since round the time of slaves there were child chimney sweeps and mill workers, people dying of all sorts, and it was a harsh dog eat dog world.

But if it's just a case of me talking about something I believe in even if it will result in social disapproval  then I wouldn't really care.

*emphasis mine*

When it was pointed out to you that there were white people who were against slavery called ABOLITIONISTS in that time period, it really leaves you with no justification to hold that particular view, hence the backpedaling...

Look, even back in those days there were white people vehemently opposed to slavery usually referred to as abolitionists. You made it very clear that YOU personally would not be among the abolitionists.

Now do you get it?

Oh ok, I do get where you're coming from now but I disagree.

The point I was making is that I admit to sometimes being morally weak.

I watch some hardcore porn now that I probably shouldn't watch, I'm sure some of the people in those films are exploited but I watch them anyway.

When I said if I was a rich slave owner I'd find it difficult to give up those slaves in an era where slavery was acceptable, what I mean is that I can imagine myself making excuses for the fact I have slaves and continuing being morally wrong but comfortable and secure.
I believe anyone who is even slightly morally weak in one instance might be weak in others.
If you're the type of person to bow down to peer pressure to make fun of someone who's to say you wouldn't join in with the nazis for example.
Everyone likes to think they'd be one of the good guys in situations like that looking back in historical hindsight

I might be being pessimistic and underestimating my moral character,  maybe I'd free all my slaves, I don't know, given other circumstances I'm sure I'd join in the abolition movement.

*emphasis mine*
Like I said, i don't have a problem pulling receipts.

[paulpablo]

I'm happy with your receipts.

There was no backpeddling though my opinion was constant.

I was making a comment about being morally weak in some situations.

I thought that then I think that now and I've thought it for a long time before I made that post.

I think that if you put my brain, your brain, anyone else on this forum, anyone of any creed colour or nationality.

Put any of our minds back into a time when moral teachings were different then it's likely we'd just plod along with whatever's going on around us.

Put your mind into the mind of a white man raised at the height of slavery in certain conditions I'd put a bet on you being a lot more ok with slavery than you are now.

Put my mind into the mind of a black man in a cannibal tribe in the year 3000bc and I'd probably be happy eating human flesh.

[Huggy Bear]

There was no backpeddling though my opinion was constant.

Whatever dude, you went from

If I was in a situation where I was part of a huge rich family who made money from having slaves who were black I doubt I'd give up my vast fortune, large house, secure family and farm and whatever else just because I feel sorry for a few black people.

To

I might be being pessimistic and underestimating my moral character,  maybe I'd free all my slaves, I don't know, given other circumstances I'm sure I'd join in the abolition movement.

essentially going from one extreme(slave owner) to the other (Abolitionists)

And please don't pretend as if that's the only instance in which you were caught backpedaling.

I know you said seemingly racist, hence the question, which comments seemed racist?

How about this one:

I don't see how criticizing these specific people is racist, I hope these people don't represent black people as a whole.

*emphasis mine*

Criticizing an individual is not racist, however worrying whether an individual represents a whole race kinda is.

I was being sarcastic. To put it clearer. I know these people don't represent black people as a whole therefore the comments I make about these specific people is not race related.

[paulpablo]

Of course I'm going from one extreme to the other.

If I was in a tribe in the year 2000BC and I came across a female member of the other tribe after we'd killed all the men I might rape that woman.

If I was a female in the year 2017 at a university in America I might be a feminist.

But here I am now and I don't think rape is ok and I'm not a feminist.

I told you that you wouldn't understand.

Also just to clarify there's no use of any strange phrasing or non conventional use of English in my post, and you're not understanding a post from last year based on a post from 3 years ago.

If it's been a year and you still think that's a good post to cite to show me thinking slavery is acceptable you won't understand anything else I have to tell you.

[Huggy Bear]

Of course I'm going from one extreme to the other.

If I was in a tribe in the year 2000BC and I came across a female member of the other tribe after we'd killed all the men I might rape that woman.

If I was a female in the year 2017 at a university in America I might be a feminist.

But here I am now and I don't think rape is ok and I'm not a feminist.

I told you that you wouldn't understand.

Also just to clarify there's no use of any strange phrasing or non conventional use of English in my post, and you're not understanding a post from last year based on a post from 3 years ago.  

If it's been a year and you still think that's a good post to cite to show me thinking slavery is acceptable you won't understand anything else I have to tell you.

I don't understand, because you are making no sense.

I'll humor you though, using your example, why would you go from one extreme (slave owner) to the other extreme (abolitionist), within the same time period? We're talking about a specific point in history.

So either you're saying you'd be both, or you are backpedaling, which is it?