so a racist got utterly demolished in less than 30 seconds on the New Zealand morning news on Monday and it’s one of the most beautiful things I’ve ever seen
who knew a white guy could be capable of such an iconic response, he knows what’s up and is having none of that shit, every other white guy take notes tbhI love that he said Pakeha
Can someone write what its being said in this?
Male co-host: We have had a whole heap of feedback regarding
Te Tai Tokerau MP Kelvin Davis’s proposal to institute a prison run on Māori
values into New Zealand. He’s looking at potentially establishing this prison
up north. It isn’t Labour policy just yet, it’s just an idea of Kelvin Davis’s.
And this has been really really divisive on our Facebook page this morning. (sarcastically)
Here I think we have the single greatest email, the single greatest message we
have ever had on breakfast.(clears throat deliberately) “’Janice’ says: Good morning. I’m
sick of hearing that Māori need different treatment. If they don’t want to live
in our society, then maybe we should put them all on an island and leave them
to it.”Male co-host: “Janice. That is LITERALLY what happened! That
is the history of our country. Last I checked, Māori WERE on an island, they
were left to it, and then Pākehā (Māori term for white New Zealanders) turned
up and look how that worked out. But thank you very much for that brilliant
insight. Goodness me. Unbelievable. Unbelievable, they actually-“Female co-host: “Actually, you can’t even get angry, you
just actually need to laugh and then screw it up and put it under the desk.
Just when you thought-“Male co-host: (mimicking letter) “’Put them all on an
island, leave them to it.’ Yeah. What a great idea that is Janice.I really need “What a great idea that is, Janice.” to be a meme filled with those stupid complete cognitive dissonance bigoted statements.
White folk are ignorant of the genocide that their people inflicted on others. Or they just don’t care.
Tag: colonialism
Climatic Chart of the World, Showing the Distribution of the Human Race and the Animal and Vegetable Kingdoms.
Yaggy’s Geographical Portfolio, 1893.
Note that ‘Arab’ and ‘Hindu’ (Indian) are considered sunsets of White Caucasians in this map. This isn’t an oddity of this map – ‘Arabs and Indians are white’ was the common classification at the height of scientific racism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and is a superb example of how racism is arbitrary, as European white supremacists nowadays consider Arabs to be the primary threat to whiteness.
Now look across the Atlantic. Although Latin Americans, North American white supremacists’ current primary fixation, are not referred to directly, you can see by the blue coloration of Mexico, Central Amee, and coastal South America that they’re also considered white Caucasians.
Race is arbitrary and changes with time.
Who gets to be in the white club varies and basically unless you’re northern or western European your white club card can be rescinded at any time.
I do wonder how much of the classification covering at least some areas reflects longer-established colonization by Europeans/wishful thinking about population replacement, though.
Prompted specifically by both coasts of British North America being “Caucasian”, when the actual natives definitely did not have that white club card any more than in the pink-shaded areas. I would guess that the situation with Mexico, the Caribbean, and the coastal rim around South America might be similar.
Which wouldn’t necessarily account for the stripe down through the Arabian Peninsula and into India, but it’s the best explanation I can think of for the Americas.
Columbus Day Is A Monument To White Supremacy
Where are the Indigenous children who never came home?
It was Soldier Wolf’s closeness to her family and their stories of abuse at the school that inspired her to become the Northern Arapaho tribal historic preservation officer and work on the return of the children lost at Carlisle.
For Carlisle’s founder, Richard Henry Pratt, an Indian fighter who once served with George Armstrong Custer, the boarding school was another battlefront of the Indian wars. Pratt devised the school’s curriculum of “kill the Indian, save the man” from his experiments in forced education on Cheyenne, Caddo, Arapaho, Kiowa, and Comanche prisoners of war at Fort Marion, Florida, in the early 1870s. The prison experiments impressed Indian reformers in Congress, who authorized the Bureau of Indian Affairs to take control of the Carlisle Barracks to build the nation’s first off-reservation boarding school.
As Pratt assembled Carlisle’s first class of students, Commissioner of Indian Affairs Ezra Hayt ordered him to take children from the Lakotas because of their “hostile attitude toward the government.” Hayt hoped to pressure the Lakotas, and other western Indigenous nations, into opening millions of acres of treaty-protected territory for white settlement. “The children would be hostages for the good behavior of their people,” wrote Pratt of his first Carlisle recruitment mission at the Rosebud and Pine Ridge agencies in Dakota Territory.
Black History Month: North Wales’ hidden links to Africa revealed
I didn’t add explicitly in that little history infodump earlier, but yes that helps illustrate the moral backdrop leading to the gradual development of racialized chattel slavery in British Virginia. Whose system a number of later colonies drew from.
(Slightly different progression: Indian Enslavement in Virginia)
The system was already reprehensible, so the people in charge had to keep upping the ante even further.
More interesting reading: Why Did Virginia’s Rulers Invent a Color Line?
(In short: Divide and conquer tactics to avoid larger scale revolt against the whole abusive setup. And it unfortunately mostly worked.
At the turn of the eighteenth century, Virginia’s rulers faced a problem that no other New World colony had ever faced before, nor ever would again. They had about 15,000 adult colonists. Of these, roughly 9,000 were involuntary laborers. About 7,000 of the 9,000 Virginians held in bondage were of European descent and 2,000 were of Native American and/or African ancestry.17 In order to suppress rebellion, Virginia had to create a free yeoman class virtually overnight. They did not have enough time to grow one. They did not even have time to train one. Somehow, they had to split about 5,000 instantly recognizable yeomen from the total forced-labor population, so as to wind up with just as many Virginians with a stake in suppressing servile insurrection as there were in fomenting it. Again, what was unique was that 7,000 of the 9,000 Virginians held in bondage were Europeans.)
That site has some other interesting essays, BTW.
More history which kinda helps explain why things are how they are now.
[ETA: This also helps illustrate why I have absolutely no patience with the folks who want to bring up the existence of indentured servants they usually have no connection to as some sort of bizarre racist gotcha. That was not a good situation in any way, but things just kept getting so much uglier from that baseline of exploitation.]
via ift.tt
I wasn’t aware that this was part of the plan for getting more colonists into Louisiana, but can’t say it’s that surprising.
Meanwhile, particularly in Virginia but also in other British colonies:
Other less conventional methods were used to encourage female emigration. The British crown, which chartered the majority of settlements, allowed women convicts the option of emigrating to the colonies rather than serving out jail sentences at home. Many female prostitutes and thieves settled in the New World rather than submit to the notorious severity of English criminal justice. (Daniel Defoe’s novel Moll Flanders is about such a woman–a London prostitute transported to America who makes good.) Many of these women convicts were brought as indentured servants; they were obligated to serve a master for a number of years without wages before they were allowed their freedom…
In 1619 an enterprising sea captain who had advertised for single women looking to marry transported 144 of them to Virginia. The captain paid for the women’s passage and, on arrival, he sold them as “wives” for 120 pounds of fine Virginia tobacco apiece. There are reports of other captains who kidnapped young women off the streets of London rather than going to the trouble of advertising.
Of the 144 women who emigrated to Virginia in 1619 looking for husbands, only 35 were still alive six years later.
Kidnapping people from poor areas was actually how they got too many indentured servants overall, but yeah. (How we got the term “kidnapping” to begin with.) Judges also got kickbacks for transporting prisoners as a source of potentially very profitable labor. But, ship crews could make a decent bit of money grabbing people to sell off for labor in the colonies.
Even likely without a great idea of what type of conditions they were getting themselves into, it would have taken some pretty desperate women to voluntarily sign up to get shipped to that relatively new colony and married off to strangers. (Especially in the days when, under English law, wives were chattel and could not readily get out of a bad marriage.)
At least from my understanding, a lot of the women who did at least semi-voluntarily go were doing it because they thought their position would be better if they signed up than if they got transported. As people who were needing to do survival sex work and/or stealing to support themselves. Not a lot of legit job opportunities for women at the time.
I went through school in Virginia, and you can bet they never mentioned any of that.
They were also much more keen on bringing up that first shipload of English women into the colony, than another first in 1619: the first shipload of Africans. (Who the Governor himself took from some pirates stopping for supplies, and then tried to hide them on his plantation. Not even kidding.)
Guessing some similar factors were probably also involved in France and Louisiana.
colonizers ruin everything
This is true for a lot of other places too. Prior to colonization, Southeast Asian women had a lot more autonomy, sexuality was not seen as shameful, and being gay/or and transgender was more accepted and sometimes even revered. SEA history can basically be summarized as “everything changed when the white men attacked.”
Before Europeans came to the Americas, Cherokee women had more political and social power (matriarchal lineage, land was passed down to daughters since women were responsible for farming, husbands moved into their wife’s house, children belonged to their mother’s clan, etc).
Additionally, they also didn’t view sexuality (specifically regarding women) as shameful and sexual assault was almost unheard of.
“Cherokee Women: Gender and Culture Change, 1700-1835 (Indians of the Southeast)” by Theda Perdue is an excellent book that describes life of Cherokee women before, during, and after colonization, and how Cherokee society and culture was affected.
I would strongly recommend Barbara A. Mann’s Iroquoian Women: The Gantowisas.
Which looks specifically at the Haudenosaunee, but a lot of similar patterns apply to other Eastern Woodlands people with similar social setups. Including the also-Iroquoian Cherokee.
IMO, Mann is much more careful not to take colonists’ interpretations of what they were seeing at face value. (An unfortunately common problem.) While dealing with sufficiently different cultures, where they didn’t always understand what they were even observing very well.
Another suggestion: basically anything relevant by Wilma Dunaway. Including: Rethinking Cherokee Acculturation: Agrarian Capitalism and Women’s Resistance to the Cult of Domesticity, 1800-1838
At any rate, a lot of other cultures just did not have the same ideological/religious investment in homophobia or anything like the same kind of gender systems as Europeans at the same time.
.
Reminded by seeing some colonial history mentioned, with Maryland getting split off from Virginia. Oddly enough there’s a Maryland not too far from us where the naming went the opposite way from what you might expect.
From Wikipedia (not even trying to add all the links on mobile):
Maryland’s earliest known recorded appearance is on a map of Essex published by J. Oliver in 1696, where it is marked as ‘Maryland Point’. The name originated with a rich local merchant who bought land and built in the area having returned from the American colony of Maryland (itself named for Queen Henrietta Maria, wife of Charles I). London’s Maryland is therefore an unusual example of a place in Britain named after an American location, rather than vice versa.
Various attempts have been made to identify the merchant. The most likely candidate seems to be Richard Lee[1] (1617-1664, great-great-grandfather of Confederate General Robert E. Lee), who emigrated to Virginia around 1640. His estate there included land on the Maryland side of the Potomac River, near a place known as Maryland Point (later to be the site of the Maryland Point Light). On returning to England in 1658, Lee bought land in Stratford, and in 1662 was recorded as owning a large house there.
Somewhat interesting connection, but yeah. Can’t say it’s that surprising that the descendant of someone who apparently made a fortune as a fairly early planter ended up a Confederate general 200+ years later.
As for great-great Grandpa who most likely brought Maryland Point back to England:
Lee was a lawyer, planter, soldier, politician, and Member of the Virginia House of Burgesses.
By the time of his death, Lee was the largest landholder in Virginia, with 13,000 acres and perhaps the richest man in Virginia.
That was after he decided to move to London, of course. Obviously not all of his family went with him, more’s the pity.
(Also, the London one is pronounced “Mary-land”, like Disneyland but with a very Catholic theme. Still a bit disconcerting, no matter how many times I hear it. Which would be more than a few, with Maryland on the train line between us and London proper.)
“Indian citizens belonging to sexual minorities have waited. They have waited and watched as their fellow citizens were freed from the British yoke while their fundamental freedoms remained restrained under an antiquated and anachronistic colonial-era law – forcing them to live in hiding, in fear, and as second-class citizens. In seeking an adjudication of the validity of Section 377, these citizens urge that the acts which the provision makes culpable should be decriminalised. But this case involves much more than merely decriminalising certain conduct which has been proscribed by a colonial law. The case is about an aspiration to realise constitutional rights. It is about a right which every human being has, to live with dignity. It is about enabling these citizens to realise the worth of equal citizenship. Above all, our decision will speak to the transformative power of the Constitution. For it is in the transformation of society that the Constitution seeks to assure the values of a just, humane and compassionate existence to all her citizens.”
— From the Supreme Court of India’s judgment on
Section 377
Urocyon's Jaunts 2.0 
You must be logged in to post a comment.