Mennonite Church USA statement on racial injustice

[Robert]

I think the meme Robert posted is a false narrative intended to downplay and minimize the history of transatlantic African slave trade because it also minimizes the conversation about race we’re having now. I think there’s evidence that this meme is connected to white supremacist groups.

Ans much of what you are presenting is propagated by a black supremacist organization of Black Lives Matter. Does it make it wrong because of the source? I presented supporting data to my post. You keep ignoring it. If you let it go, I will, but you keep pushing me to defend it.

[Szdfan]

When you post verbatim the same factually incorrect and misleading meme that I’m seeing all over Facebook, then no, I don’t think you really researched it.

http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php ... =10#p93545

http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php ... =10#p93547

I guess you were wrong.

Ok. You researched it, but not deeply. This meme takes truth and twists it.

If you had researched more deeply, you would have quickly realized that one of the first claims of the FB meme you posted is factually incorrect. Here’s a list of proclamations James I made in 1625 (he died in May):

https://www.oxfordscholarlyeditions.com ... 726-work-1

By the King. A Proclamation for proroguing the Parliament. [Newmarket 19 January 1625]

By the King. A Proclamation for restraint of killing, dressing, and eating of Flesh in Lent, or on Fish daies, appointed by the Law, to be hereafter strictly observed by all sorts of people. [Newmarket 7 February 1625]

By the King. A Proclamation touching the Surveying of the Seacoales of Newcastle, Sunderland, and Blythe. [Newmarket 16 February 1625]

By the King. A Proclamation for the utter prohibiting the importation and use of all Tobacco, which is not of the proper growth of the Colonies of Virginia and the Summer Islands, or one of them. [Theobalds 2 March 1625]

By the King. A Proclamation for Proroguing the Parliament. [Theobalds 3 March 1625]

By the King. A Proclamation for better furnishing the Navy, and Shipping of the Realm, with able and skilfull Mariners. [Theobalds 20 March 1625]

There’s nothing here about enslaving the Irish.

You would have also found that this meme is connected to white supremacy and that the comparison between indentured servants and slaves is hotly disputed by historians.

Two things can be true:

1) The Irish were brutally oppressed by the English and indentured servitude was brutal and inhumane.

2) White supremacist groups are using and twisting this history in order to downplay and minimize the transatlantic African slave trade as well as the impact of Jim Crow, segregation, police brutality, etc.

I’m not sure why else someone would bring this up in response to MCUSA’s statement.

Because "I" think is a racial injustice that should be owned and addressed. If you do not, that is okay. I am allowed to have my opinions.

I did not know the thread was limited to only the racial injustices that you approved of. Yes, sarcasm, but weighted with truth.

If the descendants of Irish indentured servants were talking about generational trauma and protesting about police brutality, then I would like MCUSA to make a statement that addressed that. MCC, for example, was involved for years in reconciliation efforts in Northern Island.

But context matters. The reason why Irish indentured servants are being brought up now is in response to Black Lives Matter and the ongoing conversation about race in America. Bringing this up in response to a denominational statement on racism is not dealing with the history of the Irish in America — it’s deflection from history of blacks in America. You have repeatedly stated you don’t believe in systematic racism — you went as far as declaring that we’ve been bamboozled — so calling indentured servitude systematic racism feels disingenuous to me, regardless of your intentions.

You are entitled to your opinions, of course, but that doesn’t change the fact that you posted a meme here that is closely tied to whites supremacist groups and forums.

[Szdfan]

I think the meme Robert posted is a false narrative intended to downplay and minimize the history of transatlantic African slave trade because it also minimizes the conversation about race we’re having now. I think there’s evidence that this meme is connected to white supremacist groups.

Ans much of what you are presenting is propagated by a black supremacist organization of Black Lives Matter. Does it make it wrong because of the source? I presented supporting data to my post. You keep ignoring it. If you let it go, I will, but you keep pushing me to defend it.

I don’t like playing Oppression Olympics and compare who has been oppressed worse, but this is where I think the differences are:

1) As far as I can tell, the amount of Irish indentured servants numbered in the low tens of thousands (couldn’t find a more precise number). The Atlantic slave trade is estimated to have enslaved 12 million people, of which 1.5 million died enroute.

2) Indentured servants were still considered human. Unlike African slaves, indentured servants still had some limited legal rights. Their status was considered temporary, even if they did not live to see the end of their contract. African slaves were not considered human, had no legal rights and were considered property.

3) The status of indentured servants was temporary, even if they did not survive the length of their contract. The children of indentured servants weren’t considered to be indentured servants. The status of slaves was permanent and their slavery extended to their children as well.

4) While forms of indentured servitude lasted in the US until 1833, the practice began to drop off after 1650, since slaves were a cheaper form of labor than indentured servants. Slavery in the US lasted until 1865 and was replaced by Jim Crow and segregation until 1965.

I am not denying that Irish indentured servants suffered under a brutal and oppressive system, but comparing it to slavery is a false equivalency.
There’s enough truth in this meme to make it believable. Indentured servitude did exist. Irish criminals were sent to the colonies. It’s the comparison and equalization to the African slave trade that’s false and discredited.

In your research, did you read the Wikipedia page on the Irish slave myth? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_slaves_myth

The Irish slave myth is a pseudohistory that falsely conflates the penal transportation and indentured servitude of Irish people during the 17th and 18th centuries with the hereditary chattel slavery experience of Africans. Some white nationalists, and others who want to minimize the effects of hereditary chattel slavery on Africans and their descendants, have used this false equivalence to promote racism against African Americans or claim that African Americans are too vocal in seeking justice.

The myth has been a common trope on the white supremacist website Stormfront since 2003. It has circulated widely in the United States, and has recently begun to become common in Ireland after the "Irish slaves" meme went viral on social media in 2013. After the 2014 arrival of the Black Lives Matter movement, the myth was frequently referenced by right-wing white Americans attempting to undermine itand other African-American civil rights issues, according to Aidan McQuade, director of Anti-Slavery International.

I think this quote sums up well what’s going on with memes like these:

Historian Mark Auslander, an anthropologist and director of the Museum of Culture and Environment at Central Washington University, states that the current racial climate is leaning toward denial of certain events in history, saying "There is a strange war on memory that's going on right now, denying the facts of chattel slavery, or claiming to have learned on Facebook or social media that, say, Irish slavery was worse, that white people were enslaved as well. Not true."

[Szdfan]

Just FYI, I’m ready to drop it. Hope you have a good day, Robert

[temporal1]

i’m not understanding why the (apparent) author of the quote (which may have been turned into something jeremy calls a meme) is ignored in this discussion.

i wrote:
i found your quote on Page 89 of a book, Africa in the Colonial Ages of Empire:
Slavery, Capitalism, Racism, Colonialism, Decolonization, Independence as Recolonization, and Beyond, by Tatah Mentan published in Cameroon.
https://books.google.com/books/about/Af ... NJDwAAQBAJ

Mr Mentan has written several books, a search of his name brings results from Cambridge, Brookings, and others .. this brief bio quote:

Description
Tatah Mentan is an erudite Theodore Lentz Peace and Security Studies Fellow and Professor of Political Science with enormous contributions to knowledge in the global political economy of international relations.
Google Books
Born: September 6, 1948 (age 71 years), Elak-Oku

i’m ok with being ignored, not a problem. i’m surprised this author is.

maybe he is a fraud. and, certainly, anyone can be a racist or slave owner, or pro-slavery.
i have not detected this.

there is abundant evidence of fear that, no matter the source, the history of U.S. slavery must not be compromised, there must be no forgetting or healing, the wound must remain open and festering. all children must inherit it.

this is not typical in either world history or the history of Christianity, wherein Jesus elevated slavery above any other earthly station, and personally modeled what that looks like for us.

in my fallible view, motivation for keeping wounds open could be about redistributing wealth and power. i hope not. because, these are ultimately empty pursuits that have no ability to satisfy.

there are many sincere black leaders who seek peace and healing. thankfully, no shortage.
sadly, these are dismissed right along with those jeremy is so resolutely dismissing with his favored quotes. (or make that first-person, jeremy) .. you cannot deny, majority opinions are not always correct, can you? maybe it’s a conundrum when a minority (bloc) becomes a power majority?

either way, when precise language is assigned and demanded, with no room allowed for alternate opinions, observations, even thoughts, this well-used trail in history reflects it’s not a wise path.
this is my discomfort with organized blocs. no matter initial intent, they go to bad places.

it may be the (new-ish) internet, but that doesn’t make mob mentality and bullying any better than any former vehicle.

Just FYI, I’m ready to drop it. Hope you have a good day, Robert

i’m fine with this, too. ^^^

[Wade]

Szdfan is our official source of conspiracy theories here on MN.

Ummm, excuse me! I am right here!

You are more like our resident conspiracy factist.

[Robert]

Just FYI, I’m ready to drop it. Hope you have a good day, Robert

You leave a 10 page reply and then say let's drop it.

1) As far as I can tell, the amount of Irish indentured servants numbered in the low tens of thousands (couldn’t find a more precise number). The Atlantic slave trade is estimated to have enslaved 12 million people, of which 1.5 million died enroute.

As bad, no. Bad, yes. I do think your numbers are a little low, but I feel no need to pound the issue.

2) Indentured servants were still considered human. Unlike African slaves, indentured servants still had some limited legal rights. Their status was considered temporary, even if they did not live to see the end of their contract. African slaves were not considered human, had no legal rights and were considered property.

From the things I have read and learned about it through the years, most were not treated very humane. They actually did breeding with them. Not good. It was bad. Live the life and you may see it entirely different.

3) The status of indentured servants was temporary, even if they did not survive the length of their contract. The children of indentured servants weren’t considered to be indentured servants. The status of slaves was permanent and their slavery extended to their children as well.

Many did not live to leave because those they "worked" for would add food and rent on top of what they owed. They were in a place they could not earn as much as they owed, thus never leaving, thus just like slavery.

Indentured servant masters were no nicer than slave masters.

I am not denying that Irish indentured servants suffered under a brutal and oppressive system, but comparing it to slavery is a false equivalency.

You are welcome to your opinion. I feel it is the same. I see it as the same. I think it is slavery in a different bottle and name for the reasons I explained.

In your research, did you read the Wikipedia page on the Irish slave myth?

Yes. All Wikipedia articles are totally factual. They are a bastion of truth. I just don't understand why I was never allowed to use them as sole references in papers I wrote.

Now, I am ready to move on. Have a good day.

[Robert]

You are more like our resident conspiracy factist.

That reads an awful lot like fascist.

[Soloist]

But you must have liked it on some level if you watched all of it?

I’ve only seen the movie.

I disagree with your approach to Biblical archaeology and translation but I can accept your position.


As for Stargate, that was one of the things I gave up when I started following Christ and yes I enjoyed them a lot as well as many other tv shows. For belonging to a borderline ultra conservative group, I'm extremely well "cultured"...
I also played Fear 1,2 and 3, Skyrim and many other occult games along with Farcry 3, Crysis and so on.
Those things represent my past life I gave up as the cost of following Jesus. I also gave up my family, theological positions deeply held and enjoying wine.
(to clarify, I don't think its wrong to drink in moderation, but I think its wrong to buy it)

These things represent the world and I used to be a nominal Christian who believed what I did doesn't matter.
I served in the Navy, I've done things I regret and I dedicated my life to Jesus in 2014. These things fell away of their own accord as I walked towards Christ. This isn't to say I never struggle... and some of you truly know how much.

[ken_sylvania]

I was being sarcastic. I don’t actually believe aliens built the pyramids and I used “Stargate” instead of “Ancient Aliens” because I was being sarcastic.

Your same "legitimate" sources also claim the Bible is sexist, racist and the history contained in it is false. Ever heard how the secularist views King David?
I'm very skeptical of data sources you seem to be gleaning from.

I think it’s difficult or even impossible to prove the Bible is “true” using external sources. When I was in seminary, my OT professor (who was an archeologist and a believing Christian) mentioned in a lecture that there is no conclusive archeological evidence that the Hebrews had ever been in Egypt. The one piece of evidence is the Merneptah Stele, which mentions the Israelites in Canaan.

I think understanding the historical context that the Bible was written in matters, I think it’s less important as a matter of faith to prove that the Bible is history or to prove that it’s true based on external sources. I agree with William Dever here:

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/a ... rew-bible/

The fact is that archeology can never prove any of the theological suppositions of the Bible. Archeologists can often tell you what happened and when and where and how and even why. No archeologists can tell anyone what it means, and most of us don't try.

We want to make the Bible history. Many people think it has to be history or nothing. But there is no word for history in the Hebrew Bible. In other words, what did the biblical writers think they were doing? Writing objective history? No. That's a modern discipline. They were telling stories. They wanted you to know what these purported events mean.

The Bible is didactic literature; it wants to teach, not just to describe. We try to make the Bible something it is not, and that's doing an injustice to the biblical writers. They were good historians, and they could tell it the way it was when they wanted to, but their objective was always something far beyond that.

For myself, the question of whether the Bible is true based on a modern understanding of history is immaterial. What matters most to me is the Biblical text itself and trying to understand it on its own terms as much as possible and have at least some understanding of the interpretative issues surrounding it.

Fascinating. So if I understand you correctly, the Bible doesn't serve as evidence that the Hebrews were ever in Egypt, but someone digs up another ancient inscription that mentions the Hebrews in Egypt, that would serve as evidence?

Maybe Robert is writing the way you believe the biblical writers wrote. Maybe he is telling stories letting you know what various purported events mean, and you're doing him a dis-service by insisting on fact-checking the specifics of his stories....