Hank:
How?
I suggested nothing of the sort. Enough with that, though.
Well, you implied that slavery actually benefitted blacks because they “are amoung the most successful and wealthy in the world.” But too bad that within their own country–which is as much theirs as the whites who currently possess a disproportionate amount of the wealth–they are at the negative end of just about every disparity you can think of. But you choose to look at the “positive”, which basically boils down to this: blacks should be grateful for slavery because otherwise they’d be off in Africa, starving or slaughtering each other in some jungle somewhere.
Which is why I brought up the mulattos to illustrate to you why saying such a thing is out-right stupid. Not only did the Africans shipped over here cease to be African as soon as the first American-born blacks were born, they also ceased to be “genetically African” as soon as they started having babies sired by white slave masters and overseers. So essentially by saying a mulatto is better off being a slave than being left in Africa completely ignores the fact that half that person is white and thus heir to all the rights and priviledges that came with that prized blood.
So in this discussion let’s convieniently ignore the black blood of the mulatto slave and her/his descendants. Let’s apply the one drop rule but in reverse. It’s hard to mentally do this, given how the concept of white purity has been ingrained into our collective psyches, so I’ll give you some time before I pose my next question.
<okay, ready now?>
Would it still make sense to compare these people to the Africans of today?