James Cameron's work might be Racist?

Originally posted by One Free Man
I disagree. There is loads of precedence of whitey "saving the day". Take africans. they are dying of aids, hunger, canibalism, tribalistic ignorance. Call it racism to say this, but this is what it is. Now look at the african american. here, heating, cooling, westernized philosophy, aidsless, home owners, political power, freedom of speech, equal treatment, etc.

Slavery has indirectly helped every single african american who has claim to a heritage of being subservient to "whitey. (while we're at it, why don't we call black men 'darky?'😉" If african americans were still in africa, the majority would be dying of aids, dictatorships, poverty, or hunger in a ventless hut, prison, or tribal jungle. Call it racist, but this is true.

And now, you can argue all you want that the current system in 70% of africa is a culture and its racist to trash talk it, but that's bullshit. It's not a culture, its a failing system.

Any culture or heritage an african american has cannot be traced back to africa, and no african american would return to take part in their culture as monstrosities equal to the ones of today were taking part in africa, such as slavery, tribe warfare, canabalism, superstition, rampant disease, nakedness, and a lack of technology.

I'm not going to respect any such connection. Assuming a victim stance because of such a connection is wrong stupid. It's a cooincidence. the connection was not planned. If it was, it's a political message about Iraq.

unrelated to my point and grossly inaccurate anyways

Originally posted by queeq
It must be great to have such a lack of historical perspective.

people like to hate.

I loathe those people

Originally posted by WickedDynamite
There is a rebuilding process happening.

They TRY to rebuild. They're not very good at it.

Originally posted by queeq
It must be great to have such a lack of historical perspective.

So how much do you know about the colonisation of Africa between the 1600's and the 1900's? Because if the answer is "nothing" your lack can only be corrective by some major reading and/or schooling.

Avatar is made of many chliches that
are known to work on movies, i dont
see any racist problem is just a white
men saving blue aliens. however each
person can make an analogy of the story
to their own circumnstances or episodes
in history.

I dont think Cameron has a racist agenda
or anything like that, he is just trying to
show a positive message, but people
can see it on different sides of the coin.

Originally posted by queeq
The failing systems as you call it were caused by the people from the West, Europeans. A lot of these countries have been corrupted by the West during the colonisation days. Heck, they just divided this continent up among themselves, took what they wanted etc. And now we leave them to rot. We owe a lot of our riches to what we stole from Africa and other colonies. We have more than enough money, food and resources to deal with all the problems these countries have. But we don't because money people rule.

And if you think that a country like America has learned from this history... Alas. Look at Iraq, they're making the exact same mistakes: invade at will, take what you want, leave the country in ruins.

And no, this has not so much to do with racism, I wish there was something like a ideology behind it. But it's all about greed, money, greed, money and lot of selfish indifference.

That is the nature of imperialism, and money, alas is in the nature of capitalism. Someone somewhere must rot in poverty and agony so that someone somewhere could have so much money he/she is not actually sure how much that is.
Capitalism.

The most hard working people are those that are lowest paid - take a look at the factory workers, at the actual working class.
Then take others for example - sitting in an office, surfing internet, drinking grande latte from starbucks...

In capitalism, only those who control the capital are the ones who are always better off. And in order to remain better off, they exploit those who do not control the capital.
Works the same on a global or micro scale.

I'm not justifying it, far from it, but this is the price others pay for turbo capitalism.

Originally posted by queeq
So how much do you know about the colonisation of Africa between the 1600's and the 1900's? Because if the answer is "nothing" your lack can only be corrective by some major reading and/or schooling.

Europe did, but that's expected. I don't care about europe. I'm talking about slavery in america.

and, like LB said, that's much more of a capitalism issue than a racism issue. They didn't colonize africa because of race.

I was talking about america when I said that the africans we brought here are better off than the ones in africa. You said we were to blame for the situation in africa. America didn't colonize africa, therefor we are not.

In fact, america ensured the decolonization of the entire continent by 1980.

America is a longer younger and has hit its colonisation puberty in the second half of the 20th century. And now it's making all the same mistakes the Europeans did. Not surprising that America was a colony itself and that Europeans made it to what it is today.
Now, with America being the largest economy in the world, consuming per citizen on average the most of the earth's resources and leaving poor counmtries to rot, does kinda make it responsible.

But apparantly you prefer the isolationist approach America has always advocated: "we only care about ourselves, screw the rest."

Originally posted by One Free Man
And how much did america, ireland, and/or sweden colonize of africa? Nothing. therefor I am spotless of all blame, much as much as america is.

Um im pretty sure there were some Irish people involved in it but not the nation as a whole. If yoiu have Irish ancestry you most likely have english blood as well, or Welsh etc

Originally posted by One Free Man
that's much more of a capitalism issue than a racism issue. They didn't colonize africa because of race.

This is very important.

Slavery was NEVER about racism. It was always and only about money.

Racism was later encouraged, because enslaved white people (yes there were white slaves) were in the same situation as the enslaved black people, the slave owners feared rebelion and/or trouble.
They were also '' mélangeaient '' with each other which also posed a threat.

They therefore encouraged division based on skin colour, as devision by class was impossible.

Originally posted by queeq

But apparantly you prefer the isolationist approach America has always advocated: "we only care about ourselves, screw the rest."

Originally posted by One Free Man
Yes. Let them do whatever they want.

The Monroe Doctrine, really isn't all that applicable in today's interconnected world.

Hardly... And not just because of electronic interconnections. Also because a lot of resources come from other countries and we don't consider very civilised anymore to harass and subject other peoples. And air pollution goes everywhere.

Originally posted by One Free Man
Yes. Let them do whatever they want.

For someone who presumably considers themselves to be particularly liberal and enlightened, you are a complete arse.

Originally posted by Deadline
Um im pretty sure there were some Irish people involved in it but not the nation as a whole. If yoiu have Irish ancestry you most likely have english blood as well, or Welsh etc

ireland didn't colonize anywhere. they were too busy recovering after fighting off the english.

Originally posted by -Pr-
ireland didn't colonize anywhere. they were too busy recovering after fighting off the english.

I know they didn't. What im saying is there were Irish individuals involved in the process but not as a whole.

Originally posted by Kovacs86
For someone who presumably considers themselves to be particularly liberal and enlightened, you are a complete arse.

He does?

From his posts, I thought he was a typical redneck.

😂 Is there a difference?