this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2024
152 points (98.1% liked)

Interesting Global News

2675 readers
269 users here now

What is global news?

Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.


Post guidelines

Title formatPost title should mirror the news source title.
URL formatPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media postsAvoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

Icon attribution | Banner attribution

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

An Australian museum excluded men from an exhibit to highlight misogyny. A man sued for access and won.

Archived version: https://archive.ph/mkwF8

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

it seems kind of obvious what their test for "non-muslim" likely was

White people can't say
أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا ٱللَّٰهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ ٱللَّٰهِ

In front of two witnesses?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

i really don't imagine it would've made much difference, kind of like how an african that was also albino still would've ended up enslaved

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Again you're trying to conflate things which are not the same (war captives and society-wide anti-Blackness actualizing in dehumanization and chattel enslavement. )

and using weak "seems obvious" "can't imagine" arguments to do it.

If a captured ship had white and non-white non-muslims on it, do you imagine only the white non-muslims would be enslaved and everyone else let go?
No, because being oppressed while being white is not being oppressed for being white.

Further, your comment about albinism proves you understand race to be a social construct.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

war captives and society-wide anti-Blackness actualizing in dehumanization and chattel enslavement

where are you getting "war captives"?

If a captured ship had white and non-white non-muslims on it, do you imagine only the white non-muslims would be enslaved and everyone else let go?

i imagine instances probably occurred both ways

do you think a captured ship with only black non-muslims on it would've been captured in the first place?

do you think a coastal settlement with a population of only black non-muslims would've been raided for slaves?

Further, your comment about albinism proves you understand race to be a social construct.

if race didn't exist, american chattel slavery still would've done, because the social construct is invented afterwards to justify the act

the same appears to be true here, just with "non-muslim" being the back-engineered justification

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

where are you getting "war captives"?

You don't consider Barbary raids an act of war?

do you think a captured ship with only black non-muslims on it would've been captured in the first place?

do you think a coastal settlement with a population of only black non-muslims would've been raided for slaves?

Capitalize Black. And "Yes." on both counts.

the same appears to be true here, just with "non-muslim" being the back-engineered justification

You can't change race by reciting The Shahada.

And irrespective anything you have said white people have never been oppressed for being white; the original assertion which started this discussion that is only tangentially related to an OP about women excluding men from an art exhibit (they didn't want to go to anyway) as performance art.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You don't consider Barbary raids an act of war?

assuming i did, declaring war just so you can capture whites to sell as slaves seems kind of oppress-y to me

given that the point of contention here is whether or not it was ultimately because they were white or because they were non-muslim, i'm not sure what point you're trying to make by re-classifying piracy as an act of war?

Capitalize Black.

i didn't use any capital letters in my response, including on "muslim" which you'd capitalize for the same reasons you're arguing to capitalize "black"

also, your linked source says to capitalize "white", which you've done at no point so far

And "Yes." on both counts.

i feel like we've hit bedrock then

i'm not sure how to convince you that pirate raids that went all the way to iceland just to avoid "muslims" probably wouldn't raid a settlement consisting of black non-muslims

You can't change race by reciting The Shahada.

i feel like you're intentionally missing my point here

And irrespective anything you have said white people have never been oppressed for being white

you restating a thing doesn't make that thing true though...?

not really sure there's much point in going on further with this since it seems like we have pretty different reads on the topic at hand that aren't going to be brought into alignment through further discussion

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

assuming i did, declaring war just so you can capture whites to sell as slaves seems kind of oppress-y to me

Where are you getting the were targeted for being white and not for being targets of opportunity?

you restating a thing doesn't make that thing true though...?

It remains true whether or not I restate it, Was restated for you benefit since you seem to be willfully ignoring it.

I'm not sure how to convince you ... probably wouldn't raid a settlement consisting of black non-muslims

Where are you getting that? You seem to be working backwards from wanting white people to have been oppressed.

Arabs absolutely enslaved Black Africans. Any Europeans who found themselves enslaved by Barbary pirates were not targeted or oppressed for being white (as has never happened to anyone, ever); some of the Barbary pirates were European.