Peterson and Schryver: Slavery Was a Blessing to Blacks

[_static]

First, I want to see if he can spell the name of the church correctly!

Do it, now.

Paul O

Google it: the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

[_Darth J]

So you think DCP and Schryver disagree with the quote Darth J put up?

They didn't say it. Why didn't Darth J attribute it to the correct source?

See, the thing is that I never attributed that statement to Schryver or Daniel Peterson. The issue is that Schryver quoted it approvingly.

[_Shulem]

First, I want to see if he can spell the name of the church correctly!

Do it, now.

Paul O

Google it: the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

I've Googled it before. And you mispelled the name of the church, yet again! When will you ever learn?

Paul O

[_Darth J]

But I am glad to see that Schryver let go of Simon Belmont's ears long enough to get up off his knees and type some posts for the board.

[_static]

Answer my question, and I'll answer yours Simon.

I don't want you to answer it. I want the person who quoted it to answer for it.

Stan

See, the thing is that I never attributed that statement to Schryver or Daniel Peterson. The issue is that Schryver quoted it approvingly.

Now you're just playing dumb. The thread title is Peterson and Schryver: Slavery Was a Blessing to Blacks and you copied an unattributed quotation in the thread. By association, readers are lead to believe that either Peterson or Schryver said it. Neither did.

Where does it say that Schryver "approved" of it? How do you know he "quoted it approvingly?"

[_Molok]

Because it does not change the meaning or importance of the first statement. The idea of God and human invention, being able to bring good in the future out of past evil does not justify the past evil.

Of course it changes the meaning of the first statement. He is choosing to offer some kind of silver lining to the institution of slavery by referencing some crappy, historically ignorant statement about some guy being glad he didn't have to grow up in an African hell hole. By this logic, the people in Africa who ended up being slaves were the lucky ones. Are you starting to see the issue yet?

[_Chap]

The economist Thomas Sowell is said to have made a point similar to that of Will Schryver's Mr. Franklin: On a national radio talk show, a caller accused him of denying that slavery had had any real impact on American blacks. "Oh, I don't deny that at all," Professor Sowell responded. "If it weren't for slavery, you and I would likely be living in some Third World African hell hole."

The reason Africa is a "Third world hell hole" has an awful lot to do with Imperialism, not through the fault of the people who lived in Africa. Those same imperialists are the ones who were selling Africans into slavery. In essence, Thomas Sowell is grateful that his ancestors were sold into slavery, because otherwise he would have grown up in the ruins that the slavers left Africa in. Bizarre.

Most of the political problems of modern Africa are connected with the fact that 19th century European powers sliced up Africa into large and fairly arbitrary colonial chunks that brought together peoples who often had nothing in common culturally, historically, or even linguistically. Nigeria is a pretty good example.

Then, under the pressure of anti-colonialist movements in the second half of the 20th century, they abandoned these pseudo-countries to the rule of tiny and immature political classes that soon morphed into dictatorships, exploitative oligarchies, or in some cases pure chaos. Outside powers were of course ready to sell arms to such regimes, buy diamonds mined by effective slaves, and prop up their favorite dictators until they became inconvenient.

[_Darth J]

Does this excuse slave ship captains or slave traders? Not even slightly. It does mean, though, that good can be manufactured from evil, that bad intentions can sometimes inadvertently lead to positive results. That, in other words, there is still hope, even amidst pain and evil.

This is the true alchemy, turning lead into gold.

If Peterson's true intent was to drive home this point, why not use the injustices committed against his own ancestors as an example? Surely something good came of Missouri Executive Order 44 or the Haun's Mill massacre. Can't he see that he's much better situated to make his point from that angle?[quote]

I think a lot of good has come from evil in this regard. Without Joseph Smith violating Nauvoo City law and Illinois law to destroy a printing press so he could cover up his adultery, he wouldn't have been killed by a mob. Without Joseph Smith being killed, Brigham Young wouldn't have made the shameless power grab that put him in charge of the largest faction of Joseph Smith's church. Without Brigham Young's desire to keep having a harem and to escape all earthly accountability, we wouldn't have Utah. And I love Utah!

[_Carton]

If Peterson's true intent was to drive home this point, why not use the injustices committed against his own ancestors as an example? Surely something good came of Missouri Executive Order 44 or the Haun's Mill massacre. Can't he see that he's much better situated to make his point from that angle?

I'm guessing that wouldn't serve his actual purpose, which I can only imagine has something to do with reimagining the LDS church's racist past.

Interesting point. It makes you wonder if Peterson and Schryver are doing this whole thing by design. I mean, they hang out together over the weekend, watch the eclipse of the sun, and make a plan on how best to go about setting in motion a new spin on Mormon racism. Their solution: assemble quotes from their favorite Uncle Tom's (or Carl's) on how blacks should not blame the white man for something that was all part of the plan of God Almighty, Inc. They mask their own racist views by putting them in the mouths of "colored folks".

Somehow I don't think they thought the whole thing through very well, though. Can you imagine the reaction if Peterson's blog were to get linked from Huffington Post or MSNBC?

[_Darth J]

See, the thing is that I never attributed that statement to Schryver or Daniel Peterson. The issue is that Schryver quoted it approvingly.

Now you're just playing dumb. The thread title is Peterson and Schryver: Slavery Was a Blessing to Blacks and you copied an unattributed quotation in the thread. By association, readers are lead to believe that either Peterson or Schryver said it. Neither did.

Where does it say that Schryver "approved" of it? How do you know he "quoted it approvingly?"[/color]

Because it is on Schryver's blog, to which the OP has an imbedded link. But you obviously did not read the blog you are defending, or you would know that.