After Russia invaded Ukraine last year, the U.S. and Europe imposed strict sanctions against the Russian government. But as Russian manufacturers work to replace tanks destroyed on the battlefield, they are doing it with the help of a machine part made by a company based in New York. Simon Ostrovsky traveled to Kyiv and Albany to get to the bottom of the NSH USA's role.
Ah because like in days of yore, some white people aren’t white to racists. For instance the Irish weren’t considered white in the US for quite a long time…
You should examine that claim critically. The idea that Irish indentured servants were mistreated similarly to their their non-white counterparts in chattel slavery is historical revisionism pushed by white supremacists.
They never mentioned anything about chattel style slavery or comparison to the African slave trade. Simply that skin color isn’t the only defining factor in racism historically, but also nationality and heritage.
We have non European examples as well, like the Rwandan genocide. People of similar phenotypes can still find other reasons to hate and kill.
No other implication was made or conclusions drawn.
However, the statement “some white people aren’t white to racists” implies that skin color IS the defining concern. And the direct comparison of white-on-white mistreatment to white-on-nonwhite racist mistreatment is a grasp for moral equivalence.
If Irish immigrants were truly considered nonwhite, maybe they would have been hunted down and slaughtered like indigenous peoples, or separated from their children like African slaves. But these things did NOT happen, and I hold that it is inappropriate to describe the Irish as “not considered white”. Of course they were white. Nobody, not now and not in US history, would describe them as nonwhite. Sure, some people didn’t like the Irish, but that’s a far cry from considering them to be a different race or color.
Irish and Irish-descended could vote, they could go to court to seek redress of grievances, they could marry who they wished, they were not confined to reservations, they could have children without fearing that they would be taken away. Indigenous, African, and sometimes Latino and Asian peoples in the US did not always enjoy such rights, but white people almost always did.
I brought up chattel slavery because the commenter said, “in the US”, and the exemplar for white-on-nonwhite racism in the US is chattel slavery of black Africans. But if one prefers to consider the mistreatment of other nonwhite racial groups, you could certainly hold any of them up to the way Irish were treated, and I daresay that you would have a hard time finding any dimension of mistreatment in which Irish or other white minorities were treated worse than nonwhite peoples.
Ah because like in days of yore, some white people aren’t white to racists. For instance the Irish weren’t considered white in the US for quite a long time…
Yeah, but both Ukrainians and Russians are Slavs, so in that frame they’re equally worthless and they shouldn’t support either.
Fair dues I suppose
You should examine that claim critically. The idea that Irish indentured servants were mistreated similarly to their their non-white counterparts in chattel slavery is historical revisionism pushed by white supremacists.
They never mentioned anything about chattel style slavery or comparison to the African slave trade. Simply that skin color isn’t the only defining factor in racism historically, but also nationality and heritage.
We have non European examples as well, like the Rwandan genocide. People of similar phenotypes can still find other reasons to hate and kill.
No other implication was made or conclusions drawn.
However, the statement “some white people aren’t white to racists” implies that skin color IS the defining concern. And the direct comparison of white-on-white mistreatment to white-on-nonwhite racist mistreatment is a grasp for moral equivalence.
If Irish immigrants were truly considered nonwhite, maybe they would have been hunted down and slaughtered like indigenous peoples, or separated from their children like African slaves. But these things did NOT happen, and I hold that it is inappropriate to describe the Irish as “not considered white”. Of course they were white. Nobody, not now and not in US history, would describe them as nonwhite. Sure, some people didn’t like the Irish, but that’s a far cry from considering them to be a different race or color.
Irish and Irish-descended could vote, they could go to court to seek redress of grievances, they could marry who they wished, they were not confined to reservations, they could have children without fearing that they would be taken away. Indigenous, African, and sometimes Latino and Asian peoples in the US did not always enjoy such rights, but white people almost always did.
I brought up chattel slavery because the commenter said, “in the US”, and the exemplar for white-on-nonwhite racism in the US is chattel slavery of black Africans. But if one prefers to consider the mistreatment of other nonwhite racial groups, you could certainly hold any of them up to the way Irish were treated, and I daresay that you would have a hard time finding any dimension of mistreatment in which Irish or other white minorities were treated worse than nonwhite peoples.