This reminds me of an episode of O&A I heard a few years back. Louis CK was the guest, and they were talking about race. Anthony said he doesn’t think the European slavers thought they were dealing with actual humans. He said (paraphrasing here) that the Europeans saw these things running around that look like humans, but certainly don’t act human. And they thought “I think we can use these. Maybe we can get them to work.”
Louie flatly rejected Anthony’s theory, and I’m pretty sure Louie thought it was funny but I don’t remember if he laughed. Opie didn’t say much at all. Anthony sounded like he was convinced he had just said something profound. I very much expected the show to be off the air the next day, but it wasn’t.
Anthony Cumia is absolutely racist. Not the kind of racist who says “nigger” because it’s funny or taboo, but the kind of racist who actually in his heart believes that certain groups of people aren’t even human.
Anyway, the video Count Blucher linked doesn’t convince me much one way or the other about whether Anthony’s also physically abusive. The camera is always pointed away from Anthony when she’s attacked. He even seems to be in a completely different room when she claims to film him hitting her toward the beginning of the video. Her tone and mood seem really strange, too - almost manic. Meanwhile Anthony’s being a complete idiot drunken asshole, offering to pay her to just leave. What a slimeball he is, but then again she doesn’t seem like a real peach, herself.
Does the fact that he was released without bail mean anything? As far as I know, they’re still pursuing the charges, so maybe there’s more to it than the video.
Since the subject is no longer even allowed, I will just give the name of the thought
“European slavers thought they were <NOT> (- ed.) dealing with actual humans. He said (paraphrasing here) that the Europeans saw these things running around that look like humans, but certainly don’t act human”
was once a common thought. It is now called ‘Scientific Racism’ Wiki had an article on the subject.
Yes, the thought was (to mangle Darwin past all recognition):
“Only white people are actually human. There are some clever lesser creatures which bear close resemblance to human, and, with effort, they can be taught to act like humans, but they are not really the same species.”
AIUI, this terminology was born of Darwin, giving a “Scientific” fig leaf for old-fashioned racism, and lasted almost to the 20th century. Birth of a Nation drew heavily on this theory.
But: by the time Darwin came along, the knowledge that different species either cannot interbreed at all, or, if they can produce offspring, the offspring are sterile. See: Mule.
The theory that white people enslaved black people because the white people thought the black people were sub-human is simply ridiculous.
See, anti-black racism was a consequence of enslaving black people, not a cause. Originally they enslaved Africans because they believed it was wrong to enslave Christians. Muslims and Pagans were OK to enslave.
The problem with this is that the slaves might convert to Christianity, and then you’d have to emancipate them. Then who’s going to work on the farm? And so you have to come up with some other reason why it’s OK to enslave these people other than religion.
Africans had been working as slaves in the New World for 300 years before the scientific racism of the 19th Century. When you read what actual people of the time thought, you see racism increasing steadily over time. Read what the founding fathers thought in the 1700s, and you’ll see a lot of, “Well, this slavery thing isn’t right, but somebody’s gotta do all this work, and better them than us”. Yes, a plantation owner considered himself naturally superior to his slaves, but he also felt naturally superior to average white people. It isn’t until the 1800s that talk about blacks being subhuman and natural slaves starts to appear.
I’ve heard that carry permits are Extremely hard to get in NYS, requiring a completely squeaky clean background. Here is a public example of a person who has one and who now has been charged with multiple violent felonies.
Q: How does that work? Do police in his town contact him and tell him his carry permit is suspended? Do they leave all his guns (its been hinted that he has a HUGE arsenal) in his home?
Do they hold them in storage until these charges are resolved… or did he just “donate” the biggest cash of arms to Nassau County since the DOD’s “1033 Program”?
Does anyone know how that process works in NYS? At what point would the cops back dump trucks and 18-wheelers up to his castle to remove them per law and/or public safety?
I’m not sure that this is a Debate; there might actually be a factual legal answer to the question of what happens to carry permits and VERY large gun collections after a wealthy and powerful individual has been arraigned and charged with multiple violent crimes in NYS.