• 1 Post
  • 1.94K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: May 23rd, 2024
  • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.socialtoUnited States | News & Politics@midwest.social•TIL: 1/4th of all US presidents were slaveowners
    3·
    2 days ago

    That’s not true, and it’s especially not true for England, the primary wellspring of American culture.

    The reality is a bit more complex but in one of the most hypocritical acts of history England actually had a bit of cultural myth that there were no slaves in England, and that the mere act of stepping onto English soil would free anyone that was a slave.

    This was more or less legal fact, though they famously worked around with it things like indentured servants.

    If you’d like to know more I’d start with

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart

    Which basically established that common law (traditional understandings of how society worked) outlawed slavery in England, and had basically outlawed it for as long as England has been a thing, and there was no other law to override that.

    Some point to this as the start of abolition but the legal basis of the case is that it was already illegal.

    One of the basises for the decision was Cartright’s case. The details have been lost but this is a decent summary:

    https://legalhistorymiscellany.com/2018/10/10/slavery-and-cartwrights-case-before-somerset/

    So, in the 11th year of Elizabeth I’s reign, a century before the Enlightenment, it was already legal tradition that there were no slaves in England and breathing the air proved you couldn’t be a slave.

    Obviously, the English abandoned those ideals in the pursuit of Empire, and there’s a whole bunch of hypocrisy involved, but abolitionism didn’t spring from the Enlightenment in England in particular, it was already there, even if they were typically human hypocrites about the whole thing.

  • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.socialtoUnited States | News & Politics@midwest.social•Two Weeks Ago, Nick Fuentes Bragged about Charlie Kirk’s Dead Ideology and the Groyper Infiltration of Turning Point USA
    2·
    2 days ago

    Traditional German name, Fuentes.

    His parents are Mexican. He considers himself white, and tbf he does look like a basic white boi. He’s also quoted as saying he’s Irish and Italian, neither of which qualify for traditional “Aryan” ancestry.

    Enrique Tarrio has a similar deal, but doesn’t consider himself a white supremacist, or white himself. This seems to break the minds of a certain kind of liberal that doesn’t seem to understand that Hispanics can be racist against not just black people, but other Hispanics.

    God knows what will happen to their brains if we get some actual Africans in trying to spread hate against Nigerians or whatever.

    If you want to call all white supremacist fascists Nazis I don’t think anyone reasonable minds that much but you need to understand that the fascists aren’t all on the same wavelength of nationalist brain poisoning and that they’re not tied to traditional definitions anymore than you are, and they disagree about what those definitions themselves.

    I don’t know if Fuentes believes in Aryanisn exactly but we do know he believes in the rest of their bullshit. Don’t assume he has to be tied down to the old terminology or you might miss the new ones.