Video 27 Aug 242,106 notes

obamas-goth-phase:

greekgodsforsocialjustice:

king-in-yellow:

hopephd:

Seizure First Aid. 

Learn it. Share it. Know it. Use it. 

100% correct medical information on tumblr for once; also consider calling 911 if you don’t know how often the person has seizures and ESPECIALLY if the seizure has lasted 5 minutes or more (which is why the watch is critical)

Many doctors actually recommend calling emergency services after three minutes if you don’t know what is normal for the person. Also, if they have multiple seizures in a row or they stop breathing normally, call for help, take them to the hospital, just get them medical attention.

The best thing you can do for them is to remain calm and do whatever they need to help them, up to and including getting them medical care.

Also remember that seizures can cause memory loss. It won’t usually be permanent or severe, but it can happen. If they don’t recognize you, or they don’t know what’s happening, stay calm, reassure them, and keep them calm.

Remember: if you think it’s scary, imagine how it feels for the person dealing with them. If you panic, they will very likely panic as well. But if you stay calm, you can generally keep them calm as well.

-Persephone (I have a friend with a seizure condition who has needed to be hospitalized twice since I’ve known her)

This is really great because I have seizures every so often. Very informative.

Link 22 Aug 10,813 notes Searching for Knowledge: Guide to Spotting Klansmen, Neo-Nazis, Racist Skinheads, and Other White Supremacists»

thisisnotjapan:

afro-dominicano:

solaceames:

wordsandturds:

steviemcfly:

pragnacious:

Since the shooting at the Sikh Temple by Wade Page, there’s been a lot of discussion about the white supremacist subculture of which he was a part. Much of this discussion has involved the type of imagery and symbols white supremacists use to mark their dedication to their movements, to identify each other, and to advertise their politics.

Not many people seem to have been aware of how wide spread these organizations are, nor how their members usually present themselves. Therefore, I’m trying to create a complete (or as close as is possible) guide to the symbols, flags, slogans, coded messages, ways of dress, etc. that can be used to identify klansmen, neo-Nazis, racist skinheads, and other white supremacists. 

If you see any errors here, please let me know and I will correct them. Please reblog with anything I might have missed, and I’ll add it to the master list. Some of comes from discussions that I have with people who’ve had social interactions with white supremacists, who’ve been attacked by neo-Nazis, or who are involved in anti-fascist activism. Other things I’ve read or heard from various sources over the last few years. In addition, I did a lot online research for this guide, and those sources are included at the end. Anything that appears in quotations comes from one of these sources. 

Sometimes these symbols are tattooed onto the bodies of white supremacists. In other cases, they’re used on patches, badges, banners or flags. 

Here we go: 

14: This stands for the 14- slogan written by David Lane, an American white supremacist, “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.”

18: “Adolf Hitler.” (A is the first letter of the alphabet, H is the 8th). 

33/5: “Used primarily by people involved in a Klan organization. The 22 represents three times eleven, with eleven representing the eleventh letter in the alphabet, ‘K.’ The 5 stands for the 5th era of the Klan or today’s Klan.”

4R: Used by Fourth Reich Skins. The 4 and the R are often joined. 

88: “Heil Hitler.” (H is the 8th letter in the alphabet).

AB: Aryan Brotherhood, a white supremacist prison gang that can be found throughout the US. The letter often feature in prison tattoos. The AB also likes to use tattooed shamrocks consisting of three 6’s woven together, often intricately hidden among other artwork. 

American Front Symbol: 

image

American racist skinhead group lead by David Lynch. 

Aryan Nations Symbol

image

Aryan Nations is associated with the Christian Identity movement. That’s the “the Old Testament was about Europeans and Jews were created by Satan and people of color are soulless ‘mud people’” folks. 

BH: “Blood and Honor.” Nazi slogan. Various neo-Nazi organizations have gone by this name. 

Blue flight jacket with orange lining: Part of the racist skinhead wardrobe.

Blut und Ehre: “Blood and Honor.” See BH for more information. 

Black Boots with White Laces: Sign of a German neo-Nazi. These are also worn by American neo-Nazis, who favor Doc Martins. (Note that Doc Martins are also popular among Queer woman - or at least they were in the past, I might be behind the times, fashion-wise). 

Black Sun/Sun Wheel:

image

Occult symbol, often appropriated by neo-Nazis, especially in Germany.  

Boneheads: Another term for Skinheads, used in the American south. 

Celtic Cross: 

image image

A symbol of “strength,” the Celtic cross is often used by racists, but is also frequently seen in non-racist contexts. The “blood drop” version is used by the KKK.  

Clothing labels: Thor Steinar, Consdaple, Ansgar Aryan, Troublemaker are all associated with German neo-Nazis. 

Confederate Flag (Stars and Bars):

image

Not everyone who bears this flag is necessarily a klansman/neo-Nazi/skinhead (though it’s a good bet that anyone seen with it is a least a little racist) but it’s an old standby for white supremacists.

Crossed claw hammers:

image

These hammers, which resemble a pair of goose-stepping legs, are used the Hammerskins, who are based out of the United States but who’s area of operation includes Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, New Zealand, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland.

I’ve been told that there are some German fascist organizations who also use two crossed sledge hammers. 

 Death’s Head:

image

Used by Nazi SS then and neo-Nazis now.  

Hangman’s Noose: 

image

Often used with the intention of intimating people of color. Can be an imagine of an noose or an actual noose. Linked to the American tradition of lynching Black folks. 

HFFH:”Hammerskin forever, Forever Hammerskin.”The Hammerskins are a multinational organization of neo-Nazis who typically take as their symbol a pair of crossed hammers. 

Hungarian Arrow and Cross:

image

First used by Hungarian fascists but today this symbol is often used by White Supremacist groups.

Imperial German Flag/Reichskriegsflagge:

image

There’s nothing innately racist about this flag (of which there are many variations) but it’s often used as a stand-in for the Nazi flag, especially in places where it is illegal to show a swastika. Wikipedia says that “Outside of educational, artistic or scientific contexts, selling and showing symbols of Nazi Germany, including the Reichskriegsflagge, is illegal in Germany… This covers the version used after 1935 with the swastika. The original flag used between 1871 and 1919 can be shown depending on circumstances in different states of Germany. Because members of the far right have used the imperial war flag as a symbol, its use is considered to be a ‘breach of the public order’ in seven states, and flags will be confiscated. In the other nine states, any provocative misuse of the flag can be prosecuted as an ‘Ordnungswidrigkeit’ (summary offense).”

Iron Cross:  

image

Fairly common symbol that is only sometimes associated with whit supremacists. More brazen fascists use the version with a swastika in the center.   

 Iron Eagle:

image Sometimes appears with another symbol in place of the swastika.  

Norse/Runic Symbols (Life Rune, Ordin’s Rune, Valknot, Wolfsangel, etc):

imageimageimageimageimage

Many of these runes were appropriated by the Nazis, and are still used by neo-Nazis today. HOWEVER, many non-racist groups, such as pagans, also use these symbols.  

ORION: “Our Race is Our Nation.” KKK slogan, often appears on banners.

RAHOWA: “Racial Holy War.” “The expression “Racial Holy War,” signifies the battle that white supremacists believe will pit the white race against minorities and Jews and lead to Aryan rule over the world.”

ROA: “Race over all.” Neo-Nazi slogan, especially Volksfront.

Rock Against Communism: 

image

Far-right music genre. Anti-Communist rhetoric is involved, but the main focus is racism, nationalism, anti-Semitism, and so on. 

 Shaven head:

image

A shaven head is the most obvious sign of a skin-head. However, it should be noted that not all skin-heads are neo-Nazis/white supremacist; the skin-head look originated in punk and mod communities in the United Kingdom in the 1960s. It was later appropriated by white nationalist movements, including “the National Front, British Movement, Rock Against Communism and in the late eighties Blood and Honor. Because of this, the mainstream media began to label the whole skinhead identity as neo-Nazi. This new white power skinhead movement then spread to other countries, including the United States.”

SHARP (Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice), which is based out of the US, is one anti-racist skinhead organization. ARA (Anti-Racist Action) is another. 

SS Lightening Bolt Runes:

image

Symbol of Himmler’s special police. 

Sturmabteilung (SA/Brownshirts) Symbol: 

image

Swastika Variants: 

image

Most commonly used in countries where the swastika is banned, but occasionally seen in the US. 

Triskelion:

image

triskelion or triskele is a motif consisting of three interlocked spirals, or three bent human legs, or any similar symbol with three protrusions and a threefold rotational symmetry” (wiki). This is an ancient symbol that is often used by neopagans. However, far Right extremists have recently appropriated it, especially in Germany. 

Unsere Ehre Heisst Treue: “Our Honor is Loyalty.” SS slogan, often seen on neo-Nazi banners as well as for tattoos.

WAR Logo:

image Symbol for California-based White Aryan Resistance, but commonly used by many skinheads.  

White Power/Aryan Power Fist:

image

 One of those that you have to be careful about. A clenched fist is also a common Leftist symbol, but is normally rendered in black or red.

Can also appear-knuckles first, with the word “Skin” written across the fingers. The word “skin” is also tattooed across the fingers of racist skin-heads.  

WPWW: “White Pride World Wide.” Commonly used as a greeting, especially online.  

 Sources:

http://vkb.isvg.org/Wiki/Groups/Hammerskin_Nation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichskriegsflagge#Kriegsflagge

http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/anti-hate/symbolsofhate.html

http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/photo-gallery-neo-nazi-symbols-revealed-fotostrecke-69688.html

http://www.adl.org

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/neo-nazi-fashion-thor-steinar-and-the-changing-look-of-the-german-far-right-a-587746.html

http://gbgm-umc.org

There’s also a call-and-response to see if you’re down for their cause. They say, “Zigga zigga zigga,” and your expected response is, “Kill a fucking nigga.” So if someone comes up to you and says that, probably they’re a Nazi and think you look like you could be one too.

i’ve seen a lot of these without knowing what they meant :-/

if someone ever said zigga to me i’d have previously assumed they were singing the spice girls

This looks spot on. 

The only thing I’d add is that “88” for “Heil Hitler” is really popular for usernames of white supremacists, but “88” is also a super lucky number in China, so a lot of Chinese people have it in names too, and are completely unaware there’s any Nazi connotation.

Message! Cus shit is is getting real and lots of ppl are gonna need this info.

know your white supremacists

(Source: praggnificent)

Photo 21 Aug 43 notes primapixie:

totoro inception

primapixie:

totoro inception

Photo 19 Aug 179,335 notes proudgayconservative:

ragingcommonsense:

gop-tea-pub:

randomgirafarig:

avalonroselin:

abunchofassholes:

thisiswhiteculture:

sheishurr:

welp


and if any of you white people respond with “wait but I didn’t do that. that was in the past”
i need you to check your privilege
and then drink bleach if you think your hands aren’t dirty

They’re not.
Guilt doesn’t transfer from generation to generation. I am not magically accountable for something my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandfather MIGHT have done. Also;
>social justice blogger>telling people to kill themselves

I love that there’s a blog called “this is white culture” that is solely devoted to bad things white people did, not their cultures at all.  So I guess I can make a blog called “this is black culture” and post gang and crime records and that’s 100% okay.  Or “this is Muslim culture” and make it all about terrorism.
But wait, you cry.  Not all black people are criminals and not all Muslims are terrorists.  That’s unfair!  And racist!
WELL GOLLY GEE DO YOU THINK SO?  Because saying that all white people are responsible for the Atlantic slave trade sounds pretty racist to me, given that, you know, that was between the African slaveholders and the British and Americans and had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with my ancestors, who were incredibly poor farmers and serfs from Ireland and Lithuania who had to flee to America at around the turn of the century (by which time slavery had already been abolished in the US) because they were being treated like slaves.  Even if they had been living in America at the time when slavery was legal they wouldn’t have been able to afford a slave; in fact they probably would have been working with them in the fields and treated about the same, since the first slaves in America were actually white serfs.  But please, tell me more about how dirty my hands are because of circumstances surrounding my birth that I could not control and continue to treat me differently based on the color of my skin without actually knowing anything about my heritage, I’m sure that isn’t racist at all!

^ This!

Prior to 1655 there were no legal slaves in the colonies, only indentured servants. All masters were required to free their servants after their time was up. Seven years was the limit that an indentured servant could be held. Upon their release they were granted 50 acres of land. This included any Negro purchased from slave traders. Negros were also granted 50 acres upon their release.
Anthony Johnson was a Negro from modern-day Angola. He was brought to the US to work on a tobacco farm in 1619. In 1622 he was almost killed when Powhatan Indians attacked the farm. 52 out of 57 people on the farm perished in the attack. He married a female black servant while working on the farm.
When Anthony was released he was legally recognized as a “free Negro” and ran a successful farm. In 1651 he held 250 acres and five black indentured servants. In 1654, it was time for Anthony to release John Casor, a black indentured servant. Instead Anthony told Casor he was extending his time. Casor left and became employed by the free white man Robert Parker.
Anthony Johnson sued Robert Parker in the Northampton Court in 1654. In 1655, the court ruled that Anthony Johnson could hold John Casor indefinitely. The court gave judicial sanction for blacks to own slave of their own race. Thus Casor became the first permanent slave and Johnson the first slave owner.
Whites still could not legally hold a black servant as an indefinite slave until 1670. In that year, the colonial assembly passed legislation permitting free whites, blacks, and Indians the right to own blacks as slaves.
By 1699, the number of free blacks prompted fears of a “Negro insurrection.” Virginia Colonial ordered the repatriation of freed blacks back to Africa. Many blacks sold themselves to white masters so they would not have to go to Africa. This was the first effort to gently repatriate free blacks back to Africa. The modern nations of Sierra Leone and Liberia both originated as colonies of repatriated former black slaves.
However, black slave owners continued to thrive in the United States.
By 1830 there were 3,775 black families living in the South who owned black slaves. By 1860 there were about 3,000 slaves owned by black households in the city of New Orleans alone._____________________________________________________
In 1807 Britain outlawed slavery. In 1820 the king of the African kingdom of Ashanti inquired why the Christians did not want to trade slaves with him anymore, since they worshiped the same god as the Muslims and the Muslims were continuing the trade like before.
The civil rights movement of the 1960’s have left many people with the belief that the slave trade was exclusively a European/USA phenomenon and only evil white people were to blame for it. This is a simplistic scenario that hardly reflects the facts. 
Thousands of records of transactions are available on a CDROM prepared by Harvard University and several comprehensive books have been published recently on the origins of modern slavery (namely, Hugh Thomas’ The Slave Trade and Robin Blackburn’s The Making Of New World Slavery) that shed new light on centuries of slave trading.  What these records show is that the modern slave trade flourished in the early middle ages, as early as 869, especially between Muslim traders and western African kingdoms. For moralists, the most important aspect of that trade should be that Muslims were selling goods to the African kingdoms and the African kingdoms were paying with their own people. In most instances, no violence was necessary to obtain those slaves. Contrary to legends and novels and Hollywood movies, the white traders did not need to savagely kill entire tribes in order to exact their tribute in slaves. All they needed to do is bring goods that appealed to the kings of those tribes. The kings would gladly sell their own subjects. (Of course, this neither condones the white traders who bought the slaves nor deny that many white traders still committed atrocities to maximize their business).  This explains why slavery became “black”. Ancient slavery, e.g. under the Roman empire, would not discriminate: slaves were both white and black (so were Emperors and Popes). In the middle ages, all European countries outlawed slavery (of course, Western powers retained countless “civilized” ways to enslave their citizens, but that’s another story), whereas the African kingdoms happily continued in their trade. Therefore, only colored people could be slaves, and that is how the stereotype for African-American slavery was born. It was not based on an ancestral hatred of blacks by whites, but simply on the fact that blacks were the only ones selling slaves, and they were selling people of their own race. (To be precise, Christians were also selling Muslim slaves captured in war, and Muslims were selling Christian slaves captured in war, but neither the Christians of Europe nor the Muslims of Africa and the Middle East were selling their own people).  Then the Muslim the trade of African slaves declined rapidly when Arab domination was reduced by the emerging European powers. (Note: Arabs continued to capture and sell slaves, but mostly in the Mediterranean. In fact, Robert Davis estimates that 1.25 million European Christians were enslaved by the “barbary states” of northern Africa. As late as 1801 the USA bombed Morocco, Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli precisely to stop that Arab slave trade of Christians. The rate of mortality of those Christian slaves in the Islamic world was roughly the same as the mortality rate in the Atlantic slave trade of the same period.)  Christians took over in black Africa, though. The first ones were the Portuguese, who, applying an idea that originally developed in Italian seatrading cities, and often using Italian venture capital, started exploiting sub-Saharan slaves in the 1440s to support the economy of the sugar plantations (mainly for their own African colonies of Sao Tome and Madeira).  The Dutch were the first, apparently, to import black slaves into North America, but black slaves had already been employed all over the world, including South and Central America. We tend to focus on what happened in North America because the United States would eventually fight a war over slavery (and it’s in the U.S. that large sectors of the population would start condemning slavery, contrary to the indifference that Muslims and most Europeans showed for it).  Even after Europeans began transporting black slaves to America, most trade was just that: “trade”. In most instances, the Europeans did not need to use any force to get those slaves. The slaves were “sold” more or less legally by their (black) owners. Scholars estimate that about 12,000,000 Africans were sold by Africans to Europeans (most of them before 1776, when the USA wasn’t yet born) and 17,000,000 were sold to Arabs. The legends of European mercenaries capturing free people in the jungle are mostly just that: legends. A few mercenaries certainly stormed peaceful tribes and committed terrible crimes, but that was not the rule. There was no need to risk their lives, so most of them didn’t: they simply purchased people.  As an African-American scholar (Nathan Huggins) has written, the “identity” of black Africans is largely a white invention: sub-Saharan Africans never felt like they were one people, they felt (and still feel) that they belonged to different tribes. The distinctions of tribe were far stronger than the distinctions of race.  Everything else is true: millions of slaves died on ships and of diseases, millions of blacks worked for free to allow the Western economies to prosper, and the economic interests in slavery became so strong that the southern states of the United States opposed repealing it. But those millions of slaves were just one of the many instances of mass exploitation: the industrial revolution was exported to the USA by enterpreuners exploiting millions of poor immigrants from Europe. The fate of those immigrants was not much better than the fate of the slaves in the South. As a matter of fact, many slaves enjoyed far better living conditions in the southern plantations than European immigrants in the industrial cities (which were sometimes comparable to concentration camps). It is not a coincidence that slavery was abolished at a time when millions of European and Chinese immigrants provided the same kind of cheap labor.  It is also fair to say that, while everybody tolerated it, very few whites practiced slavery: in 1860 there were 385,000 USA citizens who owned slaves, or about 1.4% of the white population (there were 27 million whites in the USA). That percentage was zero in the states that did not allow slavery (only 8 million of the 27 million whites lived in states that allowed slavery). Incidentally, in 1830 about 25% of the free Negro slave masters in South Carolina owned 10 or more slaves: that is a much higher percentage (ten times more) than the number of white slave owners. Thus slave owners were a tiny minority (1.4%) and it was not only whites: it was just about anybody who could, including blacks themselves.  Moral opposition to slavery was widespread even before Lincoln, and throughout Europe. On the other hand, opposition to slavery was never particularly strong in Africa itself, where slavery is slowly being eradicated only in our time. One can suspect that slavery would have remained common in most African kingdoms until this day: what crushed slavery in Africa was that all those African kingdoms became colonies of western European countries that (for one reason or another) eventually decided to outlaw slavery. When, in the 1960s, those African colonies regained their independence, numerous cases of slavery resurfaced. And countless African dictators behaved in a way that makes a slave owner look like a saint. Given the evidence that this kind of slavery was practiced by some Africans before it was practiced by some Americans, that it was abolished by all whites and not by some Africans, and that some Africans resumed it the moment they could, why would one keep blaming the USA but never blame, say, Ghana or the Congo?  The more we study it, the less blame we have to put on the USA for the slave trade with black Africa: it was pioneered by the Arabs, its economic mechanism was invented by the Italians and the Portuguese, it was mostly run by western Europeans, and it was conducted with the full cooperation of many African kings. The USA fostered free criticism of the phenomenon: no such criticism was allowed in the Muslim and Christian nations that started trading goods for slaves, and no such criticism was allowed in the African nations that started selling their own people (and, even today, no such criticism is allowed within the Arab world).  Today it is politically correct to blame some European empires and the USA for slavery (forgetting that it was practiced by everybody since prehistoric times). But I rarely read the other side of the story: that the nations who were the first to develop a repulsion for slavery and eventually abolish slavery were precisely those countries (especially Britain and the USA). In 1787 the Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade was founded in England: it was the first society anywhere in the world opposed to slavery. In 1792 English prime minister William Pitt called publicly for the end of the slave trade: it was the first time in history (anywhere in the world) that the ruler of a country had called for the abolition of slavery. No African king and emperor had ever done so. As Dinesh D’Souza wrote, “What is uniquely Western is not slavery but the movement to abolish slavery”.
To be completely fair, what was also unique about the western slave trade is the scale (the millions shipped to another continent in a relatively short period of time), and, of course, that it eventually became a racist affair, discriminating blacks, whereas previous slave trades had not discriminated based on the color of the skin. What is unique about the USA, in particular, is the unfair treatment that blacks received AFTER emancipation, which is, after all, the real source of the whole controversy, because, otherwise, just about everybody on this planet could claim to be the descendant of an ancient slave).  That does not mean that western slave traders were justified in what they did, but placing all the blame on them is a way to absolve all the others.  Also, it is worth noting that the death rate among the white crews of the slave ships (20-25%) was higher than the rate among black slaves (15%) because slaves were more valuable than sailors but nobody has written books and filmed epics about those sailors (often unwillingly enrolled or even kidnapped in ports around Europe when they were drunk).  To this day, too many Africans, Arabs and Europeans believe that the African slave trade was an USA aberration, not their own invention.
By the time the slave trade was abolished in the West, there were many more slaves in Africa (black slaves of black owners) than in the Americas. Yeah so check your black privilege and learn the facts.




That was beautiful.

proudgayconservative:

ragingcommonsense:

gop-tea-pub:

randomgirafarig:

avalonroselin:

abunchofassholes:

thisiswhiteculture:

sheishurr:

welp

image

and if any of you white people respond with “wait but I didn’t do that. that was in the past”

i need you to check your privilege

and then drink bleach if you think your hands aren’t dirty

They’re not.

Guilt doesn’t transfer from generation to generation. I am not magically accountable for something my great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandfather MIGHT have done. Also;

>social justice blogger
>telling people to kill themselves

I love that there’s a blog called “this is white culture” that is solely devoted to bad things white people did, not their cultures at all.  So I guess I can make a blog called “this is black culture” and post gang and crime records and that’s 100% okay.  Or “this is Muslim culture” and make it all about terrorism.

But wait, you cry.  Not all black people are criminals and not all Muslims are terrorists.  That’s unfair!  And racist!

WELL GOLLY GEE DO YOU THINK SO?  Because saying that all white people are responsible for the Atlantic slave trade sounds pretty racist to me, given that, you know, that was between the African slaveholders and the British and Americans and had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with my ancestors, who were incredibly poor farmers and serfs from Ireland and Lithuania who had to flee to America at around the turn of the century (by which time slavery had already been abolished in the US) because they were being treated like slaves.  Even if they had been living in America at the time when slavery was legal they wouldn’t have been able to afford a slave; in fact they probably would have been working with them in the fields and treated about the same, since the first slaves in America were actually white serfs.  But please, tell me more about how dirty my hands are because of circumstances surrounding my birth that I could not control and continue to treat me differently based on the color of my skin without actually knowing anything about my heritage, I’m sure that isn’t racist at all!

^ This!

Prior to 1655 there were no legal slaves in the colonies, only indentured servants. All masters were required to free their servants after their time was up. Seven years was the limit that an indentured servant could be held. Upon their release they were granted 50 acres of land. This included any Negro purchased from slave traders. Negros were also granted 50 acres upon their release.

Anthony Johnson was a Negro from modern-day Angola. He was brought to the US to work on a tobacco farm in 1619. In 1622 he was almost killed when Powhatan Indians attacked the farm. 52 out of 57 people on the farm perished in the attack. He married a female black servant while working on the farm.

When Anthony was released he was legally recognized as a “free Negro” and ran a successful farm. In 1651 he held 250 acres and five black indentured servants. In 1654, it was time for Anthony to release John Casor, a black indentured servant. Instead Anthony told Casor he was extending his time. Casor left and became employed by the free white man Robert Parker.

Anthony Johnson sued Robert Parker in the Northampton Court in 1654. In 1655, the court ruled that Anthony Johnson could hold John Casor indefinitely. The court gave judicial sanction for blacks to own slave of their own race. Thus Casor became the first permanent slave and Johnson the first slave owner.

Whites still could not legally hold a black servant as an indefinite slave until 1670. In that year, the colonial assembly passed legislation permitting free whites, blacks, and Indians the right to own blacks as slaves.

By 1699, the number of free blacks prompted fears of a “Negro insurrection.” Virginia Colonial ordered the repatriation of freed blacks back to Africa. Many blacks sold themselves to white masters so they would not have to go to Africa. This was the first effort to gently repatriate free blacks back to Africa. The modern nations of Sierra Leone and Liberia both originated as colonies of repatriated former black slaves.

However, black slave owners continued to thrive in the United States.

By 1830 there were 3,775 black families living in the South who owned black slaves. By 1860 there were about 3,000 slaves owned by black households in the city of New Orleans alone.
_____________________________________________________


In 1807 Britain outlawed slavery. In 1820 the king of the African kingdom of Ashanti inquired why the Christians did not want to trade slaves with him anymore, since they worshiped the same god as the Muslims and the Muslims were continuing the trade like before.

The civil rights movement of the 1960’s have left many people with the belief that the slave trade was exclusively a European/USA phenomenon and only evil white people were to blame for it. This is a simplistic scenario that hardly reflects the facts.

Thousands of records of transactions are available on a CDROM prepared by Harvard University and several comprehensive books have been published recently on the origins of modern slavery (namely, Hugh Thomas’ The Slave Trade and Robin Blackburn’s The Making Of New World Slavery) that shed new light on centuries of slave trading.
What these records show is that the modern slave trade flourished in the early middle ages, as early as 869, especially between Muslim traders and western African kingdoms. For moralists, the most important aspect of that trade should be that Muslims were selling goods to the African kingdoms and the African kingdoms were paying with their own people. In most instances, no violence was necessary to obtain those slaves. Contrary to legends and novels and Hollywood movies, the white traders did not need to savagely kill entire tribes in order to exact their tribute in slaves. All they needed to do is bring goods that appealed to the kings of those tribes. The kings would gladly sell their own subjects. (Of course, this neither condones the white traders who bought the slaves nor deny that many white traders still committed atrocities to maximize their business).
This explains why slavery became “black”. Ancient slavery, e.g. under the Roman empire, would not discriminate: slaves were both white and black (so were Emperors and Popes). In the middle ages, all European countries outlawed slavery (of course, Western powers retained countless “civilized” ways to enslave their citizens, but that’s another story), whereas the African kingdoms happily continued in their trade. Therefore, only colored people could be slaves, and that is how the stereotype for African-American slavery was born. It was not based on an ancestral hatred of blacks by whites, but simply on the fact that blacks were the only ones selling slaves, and they were selling people of their own race. (To be precise, Christians were also selling Muslim slaves captured in war, and Muslims were selling Christian slaves captured in war, but neither the Christians of Europe nor the Muslims of Africa and the Middle East were selling their own people).
Then the Muslim the trade of African slaves declined rapidly when Arab domination was reduced by the emerging European powers. (Note: Arabs continued to capture and sell slaves, but mostly in the Mediterranean. In fact, Robert Davis estimates that 1.25 million European Christians were enslaved by the “barbary states” of northern Africa. As late as 1801 the USA bombed Morocco, Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli precisely to stop that Arab slave trade of Christians. The rate of mortality of those Christian slaves in the Islamic world was roughly the same as the mortality rate in the Atlantic slave trade of the same period.)
Christians took over in black Africa, though. The first ones were the Portuguese, who, applying an idea that originally developed in Italian seatrading cities, and often using Italian venture capital, started exploiting sub-Saharan slaves in the 1440s to support the economy of the sugar plantations (mainly for their own African colonies of Sao Tome and Madeira).
The Dutch were the first, apparently, to import black slaves into North America, but black slaves had already been employed all over the world, including South and Central America. We tend to focus on what happened in North America because the United States would eventually fight a war over slavery (and it’s in the U.S. that large sectors of the population would start condemning slavery, contrary to the indifference that Muslims and most Europeans showed for it).
Even after Europeans began transporting black slaves to America, most trade was just that: “trade”. In most instances, the Europeans did not need to use any force to get those slaves. The slaves were “sold” more or less legally by their (black) owners. Scholars estimate that about 12,000,000 Africans were sold by Africans to Europeans (most of them before 1776, when the USA wasn’t yet born) and 17,000,000 were sold to Arabs. The legends of European mercenaries capturing free people in the jungle are mostly just that: legends. A few mercenaries certainly stormed peaceful tribes and committed terrible crimes, but that was not the rule. There was no need to risk their lives, so most of them didn’t: they simply purchased people.
As an African-American scholar (Nathan Huggins) has written, the “identity” of black Africans is largely a white invention: sub-Saharan Africans never felt like they were one people, they felt (and still feel) that they belonged to different tribes. The distinctions of tribe were far stronger than the distinctions of race.
Everything else is true: millions of slaves died on ships and of diseases, millions of blacks worked for free to allow the Western economies to prosper, and the economic interests in slavery became so strong that the southern states of the United States opposed repealing it. But those millions of slaves were just one of the many instances of mass exploitation: the industrial revolution was exported to the USA by enterpreuners exploiting millions of poor immigrants from Europe. The fate of those immigrants was not much better than the fate of the slaves in the South. As a matter of fact, many slaves enjoyed far better living conditions in the southern plantations than European immigrants in the industrial cities (which were sometimes comparable to concentration camps). It is not a coincidence that slavery was abolished at a time when millions of European and Chinese immigrants provided the same kind of cheap labor.
It is also fair to say that, while everybody tolerated it, very few whites practiced slavery: in 1860 there were 385,000 USA citizens who owned slaves, or about 1.4% of the white population (there were 27 million whites in the USA). That percentage was zero in the states that did not allow slavery (only 8 million of the 27 million whites lived in states that allowed slavery). Incidentally, in 1830 about 25% of the free Negro slave masters in South Carolina owned 10 or more slaves: that is a much higher percentage (ten times more) than the number of white slave owners. Thus slave owners were a tiny minority (1.4%) and it was not only whites: it was just about anybody who could, including blacks themselves.
Moral opposition to slavery was widespread even before Lincoln, and throughout Europe. On the other hand, opposition to slavery was never particularly strong in Africa itself, where slavery is slowly being eradicated only in our time. One can suspect that slavery would have remained common in most African kingdoms until this day: what crushed slavery in Africa was that all those African kingdoms became colonies of western European countries that (for one reason or another) eventually decided to outlaw slavery. When, in the 1960s, those African colonies regained their independence, numerous cases of slavery resurfaced. And countless African dictators behaved in a way that makes a slave owner look like a saint. Given the evidence that this kind of slavery was practiced by some Africans before it was practiced by some Americans, that it was abolished by all whites and not by some Africans, and that some Africans resumed it the moment they could, why would one keep blaming the USA but never blame, say, Ghana or the Congo?
The more we study it, the less blame we have to put on the USA for the slave trade with black Africa: it was pioneered by the Arabs, its economic mechanism was invented by the Italians and the Portuguese, it was mostly run by western Europeans, and it was conducted with the full cooperation of many African kings. The USA fostered free criticism of the phenomenon: no such criticism was allowed in the Muslim and Christian nations that started trading goods for slaves, and no such criticism was allowed in the African nations that started selling their own people (and, even today, no such criticism is allowed within the Arab world).
Today it is politically correct to blame some European empires and the USA for slavery (forgetting that it was practiced by everybody since prehistoric times). But I rarely read the other side of the story: that the nations who were the first to develop a repulsion for slavery and eventually abolish slavery were precisely those countries (especially Britain and the USA). In 1787 the Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade was founded in England: it was the first society anywhere in the world opposed to slavery. In 1792 English prime minister William Pitt called publicly for the end of the slave trade: it was the first time in history (anywhere in the world) that the ruler of a country had called for the abolition of slavery. No African king and emperor had ever done so. As Dinesh D’Souza wrote, “What is uniquely Western is not slavery but the movement to abolish slavery”.

To be completely fair, what was also unique about the western slave trade is the scale (the millions shipped to another continent in a relatively short period of time), and, of course, that it eventually became a racist affair, discriminating blacks, whereas previous slave trades had not discriminated based on the color of the skin. What is unique about the USA, in particular, is the unfair treatment that blacks received AFTER emancipation, which is, after all, the real source of the whole controversy, because, otherwise, just about everybody on this planet could claim to be the descendant of an ancient slave).
That does not mean that western slave traders were justified in what they did, but placing all the blame on them is a way to absolve all the others.
Also, it is worth noting that the death rate among the white crews of the slave ships (20-25%) was higher than the rate among black slaves (15%) because slaves were more valuable than sailors but nobody has written books and filmed epics about those sailors (often unwillingly enrolled or even kidnapped in ports around Europe when they were drunk).
To this day, too many Africans, Arabs and Europeans believe that the African slave trade was an USA aberration, not their own invention.

By the time the slave trade was abolished in the West, there were many more slaves in Africa (black slaves of black owners) than in the Americas.

Yeah so check your black privilege and learn the facts.

That was beautiful.

Photo 3 Aug 140,786 notes coolandfroody:

dustedsunshine:

campdracula5eva:

girlinfourcolors:

atomstargazer:

Teen creates bio-plastic from banana peels

Sixteen-year-old Elif Bilgin of Turkey has developed a way to replace traditional petroleum-based plastic with banana peels.
The Turkish teen took home a US$50,000 prize for her project “Go Bananas!” Thursday after winning the second annual Scientific American Science in Action Award, associated with Google Science Fair.
“My project makes it possible to use banana peels, a waste material which is thrown away almost every day, in the electrical insulation of cables,” Bilgin said in a media statement.
“This is both an extremely nature-friendly and cheap process, which has the potential to decrease the amount of pollution created due to the use of plastics, which contain petroleum derivatives.”
Bilgin spent two years developing the bio-plastic, which does not decay. She said the process is so easy that it is possible to repeat at home, with special care taken for chemicals used in the production process.
In September, the teen will compete at Google’s California headquarters for the overall Google Science Fair prize for 15-to-16 year olds. She will also have access to a one-year mentorship.


Has anyone else noticed how many brilliant breakthroughs in science are coming from the minds of teenage girls the last few years? Between this story, the four girls in Nigeria who invented a generator that runs on urine, the California girl who invented a twenty-second cell phone charger… Who knows where we’d be today without the patriarchal interference of men, stealing or hiding the brilliance of women?
Our future is in the hands of teenage girls, and I for one feel really good about that.

When I was about 7 I wanted to invent a thing that purified water based off of fish gills. I went to the school library to do research like a good little inventor and one of my teachers asked me what I was doing, and then told me that there were some new barbie books in, and that I’d probably be better off with those.

Don’t forget the girl who invented a torch that’d light up just from the heat of your hands
basically everyone should stop s***ting on teenage girls because they do awesome things when you let them

or that one time a girl found the cure for cancer that we could be using in 15 years

coolandfroody:

dustedsunshine:

campdracula5eva:

girlinfourcolors:

atomstargazer:

Teen creates bio-plastic from banana peels

Sixteen-year-old Elif Bilgin of Turkey has developed a way to replace traditional petroleum-based plastic with banana peels.

The Turkish teen took home a US$50,000 prize for her project “Go Bananas!” Thursday after winning the second annual Scientific American Science in Action Award, associated with Google Science Fair.

“My project makes it possible to use banana peels, a waste material which is thrown away almost every day, in the electrical insulation of cables,” Bilgin said in a media statement.

“This is both an extremely nature-friendly and cheap process, which has the potential to decrease the amount of pollution created due to the use of plastics, which contain petroleum derivatives.”

Bilgin spent two years developing the bio-plastic, which does not decay. She said the process is so easy that it is possible to repeat at home, with special care taken for chemicals used in the production process.

In September, the teen will compete at Google’s California headquarters for the overall Google Science Fair prize for 15-to-16 year olds. She will also have access to a one-year mentorship.

Has anyone else noticed how many brilliant breakthroughs in science are coming from the minds of teenage girls the last few years? Between this story, the four girls in Nigeria who invented a generator that runs on urine, the California girl who invented a twenty-second cell phone charger… Who knows where we’d be today without the patriarchal interference of men, stealing or hiding the brilliance of women?

Our future is in the hands of teenage girls, and I for one feel really good about that.

When I was about 7 I wanted to invent a thing that purified water based off of fish gills. I went to the school library to do research like a good little inventor and one of my teachers asked me what I was doing, and then told me that there were some new barbie books in, and that I’d probably be better off with those.

Don’t forget the girl who invented a torch that’d light up just from the heat of your hands

basically everyone should stop s***ting on teenage girls because they do awesome things when you let them

or that one time a girl found the cure for cancer that we could be using in 15 years

Video 3 Aug 1,142 notes

(Source: direwolff)

Video 3 Aug 308,279 notes

fvckthisreality:

zacharielaughingalonewithsalad:

cellarspider:

twinkletwinkleyoulittlefuck:

purrsianstuck:

During the Bubonic Plague, doctors wore these bird-like masks to avoid becoming sick. They would fill the beaks with spices and rose petals, so they wouldn’t have to smell the rotting bodies.

A theory during the Bubonic Plague was that the plague was caused by evil spirits. To scare the spirits away, the masks were intentionally designed to be creepy.

Mission fucking accomplished

Okay so I love this but it doesn’t cover the half of why the design is awesome and actually borders on making sense.

It wasn’t just that they didn’t want to smell the infected and dead, they thought it was crucial to protecting themselves. They had no way of knowing about what actually caused the plague, and so one of the other theories was that the smell of the infected all by itself was evil and could transmit the plague. So not only would they fill their masks with aromatic herbs and flowers, they would also burn fires in public areas, so that the smell of the smoke would “clear the air”. This all related to the miasma theory of contagion, which was one of the major theories out there until the 19th century. And it makes sense, in a way. Plague victims smelled awful, and there’s a general correlation between horrible septic smells and getting horribly sick if you’re around what causes them for too long.

You can see now that we’ve got two different theories as to what caused the plague that were worked into the design. That’s because the whole thing was an attempt by the doctors to cover as many bases as they could think of, and we’re still not done.

The glass eyepieces. They were either darkened or red, not something you generally want to have to contend with when examining patients. But the plague might be spread by eye contact via the evil eye, so best to ward that off too.

The illustration shows a doctor holding a stick. This was an examination tool, that helped the doctors keep some distance between themselves and the infected. They already had gloves on, but the extra level of separation was apparently deemed necessary. You could even take a pulse with it. Or keep people the fuck away from you, which was apparently a documented use.

Finally, the robe. It’s not just to look fancy, the cloth was waxed, as were all of the rest of their clothes. What’s one of the properties of wax? Water-based fluids aren’t absorbed by it. This was the closest you could get to a sterile, fully protecting garment back then. Because at least one person along the line was smart enough to think “Gee, I’d really rather not have the stuff coming out of those weeping sores anywhere on my person”.

So between all of these there’s a real sense that a lot of real thought was put into making sure the doctors were protected, even if they couldn’t exactly be sure from what. They worked with what information they had. And frankly, it’s a great design given what was available! You limit exposure to aspirated liquids, limit exposure to contaminated liquids already present, you limit contact with the infected. You also don’t give fleas any really good place to hop onto. That’s actually useful.

Beyond that, there were contracts the doctors would sign before they even got near a patient. They were to be under quarantine themselves, they wouldn’t treat patients without a custodian monitoring them and helping when something had to be physically contacted, and they would not treat non-plague patients for the duration. There was an actual system in place by the time the plague doctors really became a thing to make sure they didn’t infect anyone either.

These guys were the product of the scientific process at work, and the scientific process made a bitchin’ proto-hazmat suit. And containment protocols!

reblogging for the sweet history lesson

Reblogging because of the History lesson and because the masks, the masks are cool
Photo 28 Jul 334,735 notes rangerkimmy:

driftingfocus:

Take note: this is how to properly disarm someone. Always go to the outside of the arm, not the inside.

ah yes I have been doing it wrong the whole time it seems cowering in fear was not the first step


Do not do this if anyone else could be shot while you are disarming. Any other person pointing a gun at you? If clear then proceed to step one… Step one: Do not hesitate through the following disarmament. While disarming watch surroundings for accomplices of gunman. Great video…

rangerkimmy:

driftingfocus:

Take note: this is how to properly disarm someone. Always go to the outside of the arm, not the inside.

ah yes I have been doing it wrong the whole time it seems cowering in fear was not the first step

Do not do this if anyone else could be shot while you are disarming. Any other person pointing a gun at you? If clear then proceed to step one…

Step one: Do not hesitate through the following disarmament.

While disarming watch surroundings for accomplices of gunman.

Great video…

(Source: deaglefifty)

Photo 27 Jul 1,199 notes abitofaramble:

The world must know.

abitofaramble:

The world must know.

(Source: wild-conspiracy-theories)

Video 17 Jul 145,726 notes

quintessence-of-dust:

Kacy Catanzaro: the first woman in history to qualify for Mt. Midoriyama.

I just need everyone to watch this video [x]. She’s a 5 foot, 100 lb gymnast and she beasts through this insanely difficult, heavily upper body focused course like it was her morning jog. The camera keeps cutting to these massive, musclebound men in the audience with their mouths hanging open. 

Awesome!

(Source: felicityperhaps)

Photo 15 Jul 1,066 notes

(Source: coolv)

Video 29 Jun 6 notes

hitpts:

Just lovin’ me some Barbarella…

via Hit Pts..
Video 25 Jun 385,430 notes

youreinahaze:

ACTUALLY DEAD

(Source: guyism.com)

Video 12 Jun 64,381 notes

ed-pool:

THIS MAY BE THE GREATEST THING EVER

What if Marvel owned all the rights to their characters?

Video 1 Jun 7,842 notes

wifigirl2080:

covenesque:

#now that’s how you apologize

#you explain why what you did was bad

#you take responsibility and you do it in a timely fashion

Wannabe light skint apologizes expertly

Bieber has made a very manly statement of apology. Accept it move on… Let’s hope he’s learning from his mistakes.

(Source: mcdontgiveafuck)


Design crafted by Prashanth Kamalakanthan. Powered by Tumblr.