The greatest human tragedy of all time

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Organized unreligion
.

[AlexanderSextus]

i think the african slave trade was the greatest tragedy...is it true that more people died on those slave ships from either starvation or disease (and also because some of the ships sank) than in the holocaust??? I remember hearing that somewhere...

Oh, and i looked at that link about the Female Genital Mutilation and i noticed that the type 1 (clitorodotomy) doesnt seem that inhumane at all... in fact, it seemed to be the exact parallel to male circumcision, and seems that it would infact be quite hygenic...because it is not the same as the horrible inhumane REMOVAL of the clitoris which is otherwise frikkin sickening.

[Strike For The South]

i think the african slave trade was the greatest tragedy...is it true that more people died on those slave ships from either starvation or disease (and also because some of the ships sank) than in the holocaust??? I remember hearing that somewhere...
.

Do you know how the Africans got there in the first place?

[Sarmatian]

Do you know how the Africans got there in the first place?

Where? In Africa?

[Conqueror]

I think he means the ships.

[Tristuskhan]

I think he means the ships.

I think he means the ships, yes, but I miss his point... Does the fact that slaves were caught during internal african wars mean that's no more an human tragedy? Thinking that way, US civil war was not a tragedy either, since it was americans killing americans, no?

Well, probably SFTS's sunday Bourbon makes him feel like whipped when one talks about whites harming blacks. A thing that definitely never happened.

Back on the topic: slave trade's numbers are very hard to figure, since the slaves often originated from deep Africa. Coastal kingdoms, knowing they could make much profit from slaves, became specialised in raiding their more continental neighbours. So you have: people dead from the wars themselves, people dying during the trip to the seashore, those dying in the transit camps and those who died during the ocean's crossing. Only a small ratio survived long enough to be sold on the New World's markets. And that lasted four centuries.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Well if you think that what makes a tragedy tragic is the fact it was unecessary, then that makes the question a lot tougher (or easier?) to answer.

For example WWI was necessary. Not because we had to have mass murder through modern warfare, but because it would take humanity into a new age, the end colonialism and into the age of ideological extremism (making serious generalisations but you know what I mean). Which was in turn necessary to get where we are to day. Perhaps necessary is the wrong word, maybe inevitable, but even still would that not rule WWI out as a tragedy?

Same for WWII, it was inevitable fascism and Nazism would have their go at glory, to an extent also the USSR and its version of communism.

Maybe the only real tragedies are relatively minor things, on a global scale. Things like an old woman stepping in front of a bus, or maybe on a larger scale an epidemic such as the Black Death.

Or was the Black Death even inevitable? Trade routes between Europe and India through the middle-east were always going to mean exposure to new diseases and the more widespread coverage of those diseases across the planet.

Maybe even the death of 90% of the native Mexican population was inevitable. Mostly it was caused by disease, out of the Conquistadores control. Could it have been avioded (since Colombus didn't know it would happen at the time)? Is it then a tragedy?

[Strike For The South]

I think he means the ships, yes, but I miss his point... Does the fact that slaves were caught during internal african wars mean that's no more an human tragedy? Thinking that way, US civil war was not a tragedy either, since it was americans killing americans, no?

Well, probably SFTS's sunday Bourbon makes him feel like whipped when one talks about whites harming blacks. A thing that definitely never happened.

Back on the topic: slave trade's numbers are very hard to figure, since the slaves often originated from deep Africa. Coastal kingdoms, knowing they could make much profit from slaves, became specialised in raiding their more continental neighbours. So you have: people dead from the wars themselves, people dying during the trip to the seashore, those dying in the transit camps and those who died during the ocean's crossing. Only a small ratio survived long enough to be sold on the New World's markets. And that lasted four centuries.

Every race at one point or another has had slaves or been enslaved.

Is it the greatest human tragedy? no far from it. The history of race and ethnic relations in America is much more deep and complex than many people make it out to be. Did blacks get the shaft? Hell yes nobody here is denying that but to sit here and say whites=evil is stupid because there really wasn't a white identity like there is today. One could make the case that an irish factory worker was on the same standing as a black slave except he had it worse because his religion was looked down upon to while religion was one thing blacks were allowed to have. The civil war in America only became about abolition when it became politically prudent to do so and if had been for Eli Whitney slavery would've ended 60 years earlier. The cotton gin saved an unprofitable business. Not to mention that .5% of the population owned more than 90% of slave. This idea that every man had slaves and ran them into the ground is not only laughable but I am stunned at the absolute ignorance that abounds here in a place where I thought people, before spouting off on a topic would do there research on a topic and put it within context of the time and its place in history. To much to ask I guess

[The Wizard]

There has never been a Communist state. I'm just going to throw it out there...

That's because there can't be a communist state in the first place. The term is an oxymoron.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Oh, and i looked at that link about the Female Genital Mutilation and i noticed that the type 1 (clitorodotomy) doesnt seem that inhumane at all... in fact, it seemed to be the exact parallel to male circumcision, and seems that it would infact be quite hygenic...because it is not the same as the horrible inhumane REMOVAL of the clitoris which is otherwise frikkin sickening.

In my opinion,

1. The practice is barbaric, done by religious elders, not doctors, does not involve pain medication, and is totally unnecessary.

2. Hygiene is possible without removing body parts.

3. The practice is done on underage, unconsenting children against their will, for the purpose of removing sexual desire.

4. It's a horrible, traumatic event that is worse than rape.

[KarlXII]

i think the african slave trade was the greatest tragedy...is it true that more people died on those slave ships from either starvation or disease (and also because some of the ships sank) than in the holocaust??? I remember hearing that somewhere...

I wouldn't doubt it. However, I wouldn't necessarily count it as the Greatest human tragedy.

[Narhon]

The election of George W. Bush

[Europe]

I’m somewhat surprised that no one has mentioned this, “the Patriarchy society”.
I seriously believe things would be a lot less violent if every leader in the world was a woman. Now not every woman is a saint, but in general things wouldn’t result in conflict so easily I believe.

(I’m not a woman)

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I’m somewhat surprised that no one has mentioned this, “the Patriarchy society”.
I seriously believe things would be a lot less violent if every leader in the world was a woman. Now not every woman is a saint, but in general things wouldn’t result in conflict so easily I believe.

If you're playing on stereotypes, then there would also be many more spies, assassinations, targeted strikes, and so on.

[Kralizec]

I’m somewhat surprised that no one has mentioned this, “the Patriarchy society”.
I seriously believe things would be a lot less violent if every leader in the world was a woman. Now not every woman is a saint, but in general things wouldn’t result in conflict so easily I believe.

(I’m not a woman)

Women in general may be less agressive then men, but I doubt the same applies for government leaders. Thatcher, Golda Meir, Indira Ghandi....

[Askthepizzaguy]

I actually believe that gender is less relevant than the state of maturity, open-mindedness, wisdom, self-awareness, and experience of a person when choosing a leader.

Neither men nor women have an inherent advantage in such areas.

[Europe]

In light of Fenring and pizzaguys response, I guess I was wrong (should have thought about it more) . I was thinking more along the lines of Benazir Bhutto, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf and Aung San Su Kyi, basically women in the third world.


(Thatcher is a women?)

[CountArach]

.
Organized unreligion
.

Yes, damn that Atheist lobby!

[The Wizard]

The (perversion of the) state.