Post by Radrook Admin on Feb 23, 2023 16:46:41 GMT -5
African American Blacks more resentful than Latino Blacks?
First, that there is a vast difference between the mentality of the two groups should be very obvious. Latin America does not have the same black-motivated social unrest that leads to riots and the burning down of entire neighborhoods as a protests against racist injustices. Latin American blacks are not always focused 24/7 on race as African Americans are. Neither do they go about with hateful resentful feelings that can explode into a violent rage at any actual or imagined provocation.
Now, as with all other sociological phenomenoa, this vast difference between how black Latinos and Black African Americans feel, has a very simple historical cultural explanation. In this case, it can be easily traced to the manner of slavery that both societies practiced.
You see, on the Latino side, we had a slavery system that viewed slavery as an unfortunate circumstance that could befall anyone. We had laws that protected the slaves from many injustices, such as the forced separation of close family members via selling each member to different purchasers. Mothers and fathers from their children, or wife from husband separations were not allowed. Also, Latin American blacks had a right to work and earn money so that they could purchase their freedom. Once free, having been a slave was no social barrier to rising to prominent positions in society. Neither was punishment allowed to be unrestricted. The Catholic Church strove to protect slaves from harsh treatment by trying to make sure that the laws were followed.
In short, under the Portuguese and Spaniard systems, slaves were not considered to be mere property to do with as the owner pleased, but were viewed as human beings who's human rights were unaffected by slavery and were protected by laws.
Unfortunately, in very stark contrast, the Anglo System viewed slaves as mere property no better than a piece of furniture or a horse or pig. They heartlessly separated family members regardless of how closely related they might have been. They made slavery inescapable, or a lifetime condition. They did not respect matrimonial rights. Neither did they have any limits to how severely they could punish a slave, even to the point of castration or amputation of some limb, such as a leg or an arm. This could result from the slave's attempt to escape.
Also under the Anglo system of slavery, rape was legal and common. Children of such unions remained slaves. This cruel policy was justified on racial religious grounds by claiming that God had ordained it due to the curse place on one of Noah's sons, Ham. A lie since Ham was never cursed, one of his many sons, Canaan was. Ministers preached this lie, and slaves were forced to listen and abide by it.
Considering the vast social and historical differences between these two groups, is it any wonder then that they view life differently? Of course not. It would indeed be a miracle if they didn't.
Now, as with all other sociological phenomenoa, this vast difference between how black Latinos and Black African Americans feel, has a very simple historical cultural explanation. In this case, it can be easily traced to the manner of slavery that both societies practiced.
You see, on the Latino side, we had a slavery system that viewed slavery as an unfortunate circumstance that could befall anyone. We had laws that protected the slaves from many injustices, such as the forced separation of close family members via selling each member to different purchasers. Mothers and fathers from their children, or wife from husband separations were not allowed. Also, Latin American blacks had a right to work and earn money so that they could purchase their freedom. Once free, having been a slave was no social barrier to rising to prominent positions in society. Neither was punishment allowed to be unrestricted. The Catholic Church strove to protect slaves from harsh treatment by trying to make sure that the laws were followed.
In short, under the Portuguese and Spaniard systems, slaves were not considered to be mere property to do with as the owner pleased, but were viewed as human beings who's human rights were unaffected by slavery and were protected by laws.
Unfortunately, in very stark contrast, the Anglo System viewed slaves as mere property no better than a piece of furniture or a horse or pig. They heartlessly separated family members regardless of how closely related they might have been. They made slavery inescapable, or a lifetime condition. They did not respect matrimonial rights. Neither did they have any limits to how severely they could punish a slave, even to the point of castration or amputation of some limb, such as a leg or an arm. This could result from the slave's attempt to escape.
Also under the Anglo system of slavery, rape was legal and common. Children of such unions remained slaves. This cruel policy was justified on racial religious grounds by claiming that God had ordained it due to the curse place on one of Noah's sons, Ham. A lie since Ham was never cursed, one of his many sons, Canaan was. Ministers preached this lie, and slaves were forced to listen and abide by it.
Considering the vast social and historical differences between these two groups, is it any wonder then that they view life differently? Of course not. It would indeed be a miracle if they didn't.