pynchon-l-digest V2 #1327

[jbor]

----------
>From: "Christina L. Svendsen" <cls4r at unix.mail.virginia.edu>

> if you looked more closely in history books you would, however, see many
> cases of black people enslaving other black people of different
> ethnicities before many white traders showed up on African shores,

A minor quibble, but Western historiography requiring primary source data
and documentation and all, how reliable can this claim be?

> and
> then later selling black people of other ethnicities to these very same
> white traders in exchange for things like gunpowder and alcohol.

The fact that gunpowder and alcohol are involved indicates to me that white
imperialism rather than traditional African cultural practices are
motivating factors here.

It's not an area of particular expertise for me and I'm happy to be
corrected. I'm not so naive to believe that violence and cruelty were and
are not inherent in black African cultures also.

> the fact that black people are just as morally capable as white ones

By whose system of morality are you making this comparison?

> the fact that black people are just as morally capable as white ones of
> engaging in slavery, genocide, etc. etc. is yet another measure of their
> "equality" "averageness" "humanity." a darker measure of it in fact.
>
> if you look in history books about intra- and inter- national african
> history you will find yet more sad stories of racial problems among black
> people of different races.

It would seem to me that "intra-national" oppression is simply a round-about
way of describing the social hierarchy within a particular tribal group. By
that definition the working class in a capitalist society can be described
as wage-slaves. Certainly the terrible inter-tribal pogroms of the last few
decades (eg Mozambique, Rwanda) are due in large part to the legacy of white
colonialism. In other instances (eg Sierra Leone, Zimbabwe) the renegade
tribes merely adopt the weaponry, uniforms and militaristic mentality of the
white imperialists. (cf the Schwarzkommando in GR)

> indeed, all black people are not of one single
> race!

The notion that the human *race* is made up of a whole bunch of different
*races* is one of those convenient lapses in logic of Western languages.
It's a linguistic anomaly which is used to cover a multitude of sins.

> i would suggest that you don't find many cases of blacks enslaving whites
> simply because of historical economic & technological differences.

There's still an enormous difference between the perception of a human
opponent and of a human as a piece of livestock.

> but other groups, such as the ashanti in what is now ghana, had no problem
> with it.

Not familiar with this tribe. The Ghanaian Fante people, however, were
apparently very pacifistic and welcoming to others.

> what i'm saying seems to be that you are creating an
> o v e r s i m p l i f i c a t i o n.

As you also are with the inference that Australian Aborigines are a discrete
tribal group. It isn't a treatise; it's a few quick-scrawled paragraphs.
Deal with the issues.

> i don't like your dismissive tone. ("apparently intelligent ppl..." is
> not good argumentation.)

Actually, this was a compliment. Racial discrimination is generally based on
false precepts (eg Hitler et. al. and phrenology) or borne of ignorance.
Jody Porter, to whom I addressed the comment, *is* apparently very
intelligent.

> can you really dismiss anyone affiliated in any way with a university ipso
> facto? isn't that somewhat arrogant?
>
> a bad generalization?

I think you've misread this part of the exchange. I was addressing Jody's
assertion. Perhaps I telegraphed my point, but it was that *even if*
students are "prey" to the biases and foibles of English professors and
teachers, Pynchon's texts will (hopefully) speak for themselves.

best