Well perhaps I should have expressly acknowledged what you had turned up about James 1 and Virginia but I was responding really to your damning of the Brits (say I whose first Australian ancestors were Irish and Catholic) by treating more than 200 years of change in an undifferentiated way. Come to think of it, why didn’t worthy Brits, evangelical or ruling class immediately have anaesthesia for painful child birth made avsilable to all classes the moment Queen Victoria had rejoiced in its use c. 1848?

It’s good to find someone attempting detail and precision in the UR comments and excuse me if I don’t respond with adequate attention to your detail. But, as I indicated, I was just usimg Maslow to point in a shorthand way to the kind of point I was making and you miss my point if you keep on asking me to say what Maslow said. I merely suggest that it is fairly obvious that being regarded, preferably justly, as well-informed, intelligent, principled, courteous, restrained and deliberate, magnanimous, generous**, well-presented etc is something people would generally wish applied to them rather than any deficiency in those actual or perceived qualities and it is blindingly obvious that time and energy consuming pressures to ensure that the lower level needs are satisfied, both material and emotional or social, must tend to detract from the higher satisfactions and behavioural patterns.

It is true, as you point out, that maintaining status (or even solvency!) among the rich can militate against their behaving well. Indeed those they would like to think of as their peers often notice and disapprove – or not, as you might justly point out. Rudeness to servants is not unknown amongst the new rich and social climbing husbands and wives sometimes defeat the benignity of the other.

Yet again one should note relativity. All sorts of cruelty, and servitude, was just part of the order of things in the past and a community where all are comfortably prosperous may experience cross currents which are quite different from one where there are rich and poor, high and low caste, etc.

All sorts of details may be important too. For example the availability of anaesthesia has surely had a lot to do with the decline in tolerance for physical cruelty whether to humans or animals and whether by or against the law. Clearly the tribal chief who takes you in and shares the tribe’s food with you and your starving lost fellow travellers is likely to be tolerant of or indifferent to people suffering pain that we soft moderns would not be.

So I maintain the truth of the tendency I generalise about – as a generalisation with usually individual exceptions.

**interesting isn’t it how often someone is described as “generous” when they are actually giving a very small proportion of what they have, or are even spending taxpayers’ or shareholders’ money!? Well its probably a good thing to say if you want more from the same source:-)

“You also don’t really seem to be contesting the point I made by using reference to Maslow as shorthand.”

You glossed over my point. How convenient. Maslow stated PEOPLE, regardless of social status, are motivated to achieve certain needs. When one need is fulfilled, a person seeks to fulfill the next one. Every person is capable and has the desire to move up the hierarchy toward a level of self-actualization

Please show where he himself stated specifically that the poor and desperate are less likely to be able to demonstrate kindness compared to the wealthy.

“The answer to your question is obvious but it is equally obvious that the prestige of the “big man” or the very generous benefactor or giver of time to the needy is something more likely to be sought…”

“Civility and restraint”. You insisted that the wealthy, as espoused by Maslow’s hierarchy, will demonstrate those traits more consistently compared to the poor. You are assuming that the rich will, on the whole, be more willing to share their blessings with the non-rich, that the non-rich, despite having little or no materialistic items, is somehow more likely to be uncivil and show less restraint.

Did Maslow make this determination, or is it your opinion?

Just because a person has “more stuff” than another person does not mean he/she is more willing to help those with “less stuff”.

You are also minimizing the immense pressures that the wealthy have in their position to maintain and exceed their status, which may result in their outward behavior being less than “civil” or exhibiting “restraint”.

“but you have changed the goalposts by suggesting that they should have acted (with what some unstated power or influence) preemptively before there was a major known evil, by the most advanced standards of the day, to fight.”



There is no changing of any goalposts. I acknowledge the significance of British evangelicals in helping to eradicate slavery. That issue is closed. I am asking that when slavery began to rear its ugly head in the British Empire, where were those evangelicals? What were they doing to end that scourge? Not “preemptively before”, but immediately after. Major difference.

“Also anachronistically you are conflating the world of the foundation of Virginia when James 1 could still claim the divine right of kings without anyone laughing with the post civil war, post Cromwell, post Glorious Revolution and Bill of Rights world wherein the elements of modern constitutional monarchy andcthe supremacy of parliament only came together under the Hanoverians during the long first prime ministership of Sir Robert Walpole who governed through his control of the House of Commons.”

There is no conflating anything. Since when is James I insistence of political superiority over Parliament remotely related to official monarchial economic policy? I provided specific evidence indicating that the British crown officially sanctioned slavery. There was a direct partnership with Parliament in this matter.

https://books.google.com/books?id=3FMFAAAAQAAJ&pg=RA1-PA83&lpg=RA1-PA83&dq=James+I+king+england+sanctioned+slavery&source=bl&ots=P0Bb5nYzb-&sig=XfhC48QhzJk4QePjbWTn_o0VHtE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwib5uKrhMjMAhUJMSYKHVIxCK0Q6AEIPjAH#v=onepage&q=James%20I%20king%20england%20sanctioned%20slavery&f=false

“The harvest of sugar, ginger, and pearls…transported to Hispaniola, attracted the attention of Queen Elizabeth, who encouraged the trade, and participated in its profits. The slave trade was fostered and promoted by James the First, by Charles the First, by Charles the Second, and by William the Third. It received the sanction, and was encouraged by repeated acts of the British Parliament. It was the fixed policy of Great Britain to advance this trade, which was solemnly declared to be highly beneficial to the nation.”



Lucy has some ‘splainin’ to do…

You also don’t really seem to be contesting the point I made by using reference to Maslow as shorthand. The answer to your question is obvious but it is equally obvious that the prestige of the “big man” or the very generous benefactor or giver of time to the needy is something more likely to be sought and achieved by those whose material needs are well satisfied than by those who are subject to many pressures in their lives. Exceptions abound but that doesn’t negate the generality.

You don’t seem to be denying my suggestion about the role of British evangelicals in ending slavery (not that I have any particular interest in evangelical or any Christianity) but you have changed the goalposts by suggesting that they should have acted (with what some unstated power or influence) preemptively before there was a major known evil, by the most advanced standards of the day, to fight.

Also anachronistically you are conflating the world of the foundation of Virginia when James 1 could still claim the divine right of kings without anyone laughing with the post civil war, post Cromwell, post Glorious Revolution and Bill of Rights world wherein the elements of modern constitutional monarchy andcthe supremacy of parliament only came together under the Hanoverians during the long first prime ministership of Sir Robert Walpole who governed through his control of the House of Commons.

“Are you familiar with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs?”

According to his theory, all people are able to meet their needs and achieve self-actualization. One need not only be rich and powerful to show civility and restraint, those are human traits regardless of socio-economic condition. Did Maslow himself state specifically that the poor and desperate are less likely to be able to demonstrate kindness compared to the wealthy?

“And what makes you say that “slavery and child labor” were “the official policy of the British Ctown”? You are obviously no histotian, or lawyer.”

Seriously? That would mean southern planation owners in 1600’s Virginia, for example, would have been exercising their own liberty without sanction by the monarchy regarding their financial enterprises. Do you honestly believe the British Crown would shirk their economic responsibility to control commerce?

This source indicates that indeed slavery was under the direction of the British Crown in regards to its legality and its organizational structure.

“From 1660, the British crown passed various acts and granted charters to enable companies to settle, administer, and exploit British interests on the West Coast of Africa and to supply slaves to the American colonies”.

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/slavery/pdf/britain-and-the-trade.pdf

“Feel free to suppose that tribal people without “guns, (European) germs and steel” might have preferred dying in tribal fights or otherwise at 30, toothache, unmended broken bones, forced marriage of 12 year olds to old men etc. to the blessings of modernity that practically everyone adopts these days.”



Undoubtedly tribal groups benefitted from European technology. The question is did Africans desire to have their liberty stripped from them and their ways of life interfered with? Was it the European domain to control a group merely because they thought they were more civilized?

“It was the rise of the British evangelicals that arguably did most to end slavery and, before that, the slave trade, perhaps fifty years earlier than would have happened without them…”

So where were their vigorous protests when slavery was becoming a major money maker for the British Empire?

“Determination” ? Do you perhaps mean “opinion”? Are you familiar with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs? That would give you the idea of what I am talking about here if life experience and observation isn’t enough.

Feel free to suppose that tribal people without “guns, (European) germs and steel” might have preferred dying in tribal fights or otherwise at 30, toothache, unmended broken bones, forced marriage of 12 year olds to old men etc. to the blessings of modernity that practically everyone adopts these days.

And what makes you say that “slavery and child labor” were “the official policy of the British Ctown”? You are obviously no histotian, or lawyer. It was the rise of the British evangelicals that arguably did most to end slavery and, before that, the slave trade, perhaps fifty years earlier than would have happened without them – and it was the Industrial Revolution (which started in Britain) which gave the necessary horsepower to the reform movements.

“How about recognising that, on the whole the rich (if not the grossly greedily rich) and successful treat people with restraint, civility, even kindness compared to the poor and desperate (and the mutual support to other tribal insiders given by hunter gatherers is not a counter example in the world of agriculture and urban life).”

How are you able to state this determination as fact?

“Then you don’t have to be surprised that the British evangelical middle classes of the late 18th and early 19th century (for example) were ahead of nearly all the rest of the world in promoting what was becoming the blessings of modernity with all its advantages to nearly everyone compared to the world of 1750.”

Maybe these blessings were curses to people who preferred to live their life in a minimalist fashion.

“But the British middle classes circa 1780 harboured the kind of Christians who did most to abolish slavery, protect indigenous primitives and enact legislation to restrict the damaging employment of children.”



Praytell, where were those Christians ensuring that slavery and child labor had NOT been official policy of the British Crown? Were not those same Christians promoting their culture as being superior, while having the compulsion to ensure that blacks and kids were treated more “civil”?

I suppose better late than never…

“I hope it is only carelessness and not dimwitedness which makes you write that when in fact what Steve said was that their being pygmies was the main thing about the story that would elicit attention and sympathy to the plight of the Mbuti.”


You and Steve, based on I would imagine is a distrust of liberal media, are making the point the author purposely and willingly misled readers in some fashion by failing to admit the story is essence about “Human Biodiversity”, that the writing is tedious, that the narrative is “PC”. That is crafting a narrative.

You have a strange compulsion to defend racketeers. Perhaps you could put in a good word for pimps sometime.

You write alternately like a nitwit or a lunatic. So which are you?

“1. You started out saying DeBeers was a monopoly. Now you say it’s one of many producers.

Standard Oil was called a monopoly, and it was never the only producer.

“2. You implied diamonds weren’t much rarer than rocks. “Are they rarer than rocks? Sure.” That sounds like diamonds aren’t much more scarce than rocks.”

I said what I said, and implied what I implied. I am not responsible for what it sounds like to you.

“You see astronomical is the word you imply. If diamonds were so cheap and common and sold as precious and rare, the difference would be astronomical.”

You want to comment? Comment. Don’t rewrite mine. I didn’t say “astronomical” – you did.

“4. Cartels like OPEC are able to influence prices. Your argument however instead is about astronomical differences between cost and pricing. You have claimed diamonds are very common and since sell for an extremely high price the difference is much more than 25% excess.”

I never quoted a number at all. You are reading things that aren’t there.

“Who says they don’t cheat? I never did.” You missed the point about cartels. You have claimed there is an extremely significant difference between cost and pricing. With so many producers and such a high risk of cheating, that’s not possible to maintain. So this fantasy world of DeBeers collecting astronomical monopoly rent as you’ve imagined is impossible.”

Perhaps you are one of these homo economus types who wouldn’t stoop down to pick up a ten dollar bill on the sidewalk, because it couldn’t possibly be there.

” I doubt you are accomplished or smart.”

So it is an econ degree, isn’t it? The sense of desperate inferiority shows.

1.See if you can recover some respect for your intellectual acumen by showing that you can justify the word “dishonest”, indeed “fundamentally dishonest” on the basis of what I wrote. (But don’t spend too much time on it. Your efforts coulf only be embarrassing to your smarter friends).

2. “From my vantage point” doesn’t help you when you are accused accurately of objective logical or factual error. And it doesn’t help to say “Mr Sailer inserted the narrative [sic]” when the only narrative was the New York Times story,I and Sailer – who would qualify as an expert witness on the Anglophone media – notes that the story in the NYT is told in a remarkably boring way for a use of newsprint which necessarily must try to grab its readers both to inform them and to keep them subscribing [yes, I know he didn’t spell all that out in such simple terms; out of respect for most of his readers undoubtedly]. His point is to connect the boring way the story is told, compared with the old fashioned non PC journalism of the Daily Mail, to some current PC fashions. And if you didn’t get that then he is justified in thinking it was worthwhile to make his point to alert those of us who are too busy or lacking sensitivity to usage to one of today’s distortions of the American media.

This is pretty much common knowledge, but here goes.

The Incredible Story Of How De Beers Created And Lost The Most Powerful Monopoly Ever

De Beers and Beyond: The History of the International Diamond Cartel

No problem Sam – I know, what a great resource! I actually came across it as referenced by the brilliant Prof. Jonathan Brown of Georgetown U.

Best!

Talha thanks so much for finding this map!

You are being fundamentally dishonest. The author of the story offered background information regarding who are the groups involved. One such group were a tribe that are known as pygmies.

The gist of the story was the depravity being displayed in a certain part of the world by two rivals over land rights and labor practices. Mr. Sailer, from my vantage point, inserted the narrative to promote an agenda–the only reason why anyone would care about this story is because some wee widdle bwacks are being “bullied” by larger bwacks, when in reality the nature and stature of pygmies is only part of the story.

1. You started out saying DeBeers was a monopoly. Now you say it’s one of many producers
2. You implied diamonds weren’t much rarer than rocks. “Are they rarer than rocks? Sure.” That sounds like diamonds aren’t much more scarce than rocks.
3. “product they sell is actually rare and precious, when it is in fact rather common and cheap.” You see astronomical is the word you imply. If diamonds were so cheap and common and sold as precious and rare, the difference would be astronomical.
4. Cartels like OPEC are able to influence prices. Your argument however instead is about astronomical differences between cost and pricing. You have claimed diamonds are very common and since sell for an extremely high price the difference is much more than 25% excess.
5. “Who says they don’t cheat? I never did.” You missed the point about cartels. You have claimed there is an extremely significant difference between cost and pricing. With so many producers and such a high risk of cheating, that’s not possible to maintain. So this fantasy world of DeBeers collecting astronomical monopoly rent as you’ve imagined is impossible.
6. “That sounds like a pretty fat profit to me. I’d take it.” And we reach the end where in desperately trying to concede nothing you change your argument. All along you were actually arguing that DeBeers has just engineered market power abuse in the range of 25% rent. Yeah right. You lost and have abandoned your original argument.

Judging my how you made a lot of inaccurate comments in this thread and and in the same thread deny the meaning of your own words, I doubt you are accomplished or smart.

“Let’s see. You think diamonds are just a cut above rocks in scarcity. So that means it takes about a few dollars of effort to extract a gem.”

I never said that. I said they are not as uncommon as diamond merchants claim.

“Yet at the same time you concede now after doing research that DeBeers is one producer among many. There are many other producers in places like Angola, Russia, Zimbabwe, that do not share the corporate culture of DeBeers.”

I did not need to do any research to find that DeBeers is one of many producers. I was well aware of that before.

“Yet somehow there is an ongoing conspiracy among dozens of producers to sell this not too scarce rock—just costs a dollar to produce a gem according to you—for really, really astronomical profits.”

I never used the word “astronomical”. That is your word, not mine. Do you maintain that producers of commodities do not collude to set production and fix prices. Ever? Ever heard of OPEC?

“Somehow this massive conspiracy of very diverse people doesn’t cheat on each other, keeping the charade going of selling a low value rock for unbelievable profits.

Who says they don’t cheat? I never did. OPEC members cheated too. The fact that cheating goes on among the members of a cartel is not proof of there not being a cartel. DeBeers also has a vast marketing operation, which your average blood-diamond dealing warlord in central Africa does not have.

Again, try to sell a diamond back to a jeweler. How much will you get for it, as a fraction of the purhcase price. How does that compare to gold or silver? Or a gun? Or a car?

“(Past and present price fixing or collusion among large producers probably raises the price by 25% so don’t bother to claim that as support for the argument you are now making.)”

I don’t have to. You just made it for me. A 25% premium over-and-above the otherwise “normal” price, which itself includes a profit margin and the production cost – for what is essentially a useless bauble? That sounds like a pretty fat profit to me. I’d take it.

“A lot of readers here are low accomplishment men who want to think that because they hold the secrets of HBD, they are superior to much more accomplished people and the masses because they know How the World Really Works, special insight that the sheep masses don’t have about the naked emperor.”

And what is your super-power that persuades you to believe that you are superior to the masses? An economics degree? Your dog-eared copy of Atlas Shrugged? I’d bet I’m generally a lot smarter than you are. Possibly more accomplished as well.

If you don’t want to be seen as no more than a blathering incontinent troll at least take the care not to make elementary errors. You are just plain wrong – and it didn’t take diligent proof reading to spot it – when you say “No, Steve, YOU are making the case that the main thing about the story is the fact that they are pygmies”.

I hope it is only carelessness and not dimwitedness which makes you write that when in fact what Steve said was that their being pygmies was the main thing about the story that would elicit attention and sympathy to the plight of the Mbuti.

You are making a lot of silly anachronistic points jumping around in places and times that mean it is impossible to see whether your apples and pears comparisons are just that or make some sense by some standards.

How about recognising that, on the whole the rich (if not the grossly greedily rich) and successful treat people with restraint, civility, even kindness compared to the poor and desperate (and the mutual support to other tribal insiders given by hunter gatherers is not a counter example in the world of agriculture and urban life). Then you don’t have to be surprised that the British evangelical middle classes of the late 18th and early 19th century (for example) were ahead of nearly all the rest of the world in promoting what was becoming the blessings of modernity with all its advantages to nearly everyone compared to the world of 1750. Many give Christianity much credit for what we like about our world compared to that of the historical past. Lots of causes and trends are worth examining. But the British middle classes circa 1780 harboured the kind of Christians who did most to abolish slavery, protect indigenous primitives and enact legislation to restrict the damaging employment of children.

Funny how the generation with the collective attention span of a gnat needs 1,500 words to get to the point!

Let’s see. You think diamonds are just a cut above rocks in scarcity. So that means it takes about a few dollars of effort to extract a gem.

Yet at the same time you concede now after doing research that DeBeers is one producer among many. There are many other producers in places like Angola, Russia, Zimbabwe, that do not share the corporate culture of DeBeers. Yet somehow there is an ongoing conspiracy among dozens of producers to sell this not too scarce rock—just costs a dollar to produce a gem according to you—for really, really astronomical profits. Somehow this massive conspiracy of very diverse people doesn’t cheat on each other, keeping the charade going of selling a low value rock for unbelievable profits. (Past and present price fixing or collusion among large producers probably raises the price by 25% so don’t bother to claim that as support for the argument you are now making.)

I’m making this argument not because I am connected to DeBeers but to point out how typical you are of iSteve readers. You don’t know a whole lot about how business works but that doesn’t keep you from thinking you have special analytical powers for seeing how things really work.

A lot of readers here are low accomplishment men who want to think that because they hold the secrets of HBD, they are superior to much more accomplished people and the masses because they know How the World Really Works, special insight that the sheep masses don’t have about the naked emperor.

But as you can see here you don’t know much, but you have a lot of smug attitude.

And another fascinating map I came across…

Interactive map of all locations of historic battles fought from the year 2500 BC to present. Amazing!

http://battles.nodegoat.net/viewer.p/23/385/scenario/1/geo/fullscreen

Spectacular work!

Dear Corvinus,

It sure is interesting where the greatest slaughters due to war through the ages have occurred:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_by_death_toll

I wonder what one can glean from the numbers and locations…

Peace.

Piltdown, Thank you for your reply. Geography was a favorite subject of my youth. We learned about the diversity of the world’s people, but diversity had a different meaning then.

woodNfish…

“More proof that black violence is genetic…”

Actually, it’s tribal warfare violence between competing groups, similar to Europeans vying for control. Human beings are prone to violence.


Stan d Mute…

“There is no question the descendants of American slaves are better off than their cousins who never left Africa.”



Actually, those who remained in Africa were free to pursue their own endeavors. That freedom did not exist in America for slaves. Why are you an opponent of liberty?

“We know that life for the African in Africa was short and brutal while for the slaves it was very much a mixed bag particularly in America…”



The deciding factor was that Africans were ripped from their homelands. More proof that white violence is genetic 🙂

““Given the economic value of slaves, we can be certain they were better fed, clothed, educated, and housed than they were back in Africa.”

According to Western standards. But I’m fairly certain that Africans were content with living how they saw fit in a manner they had control over.

“Surely there were some thoroughly evil slave owners who committed unspeakable atrocities, but was that as common as the evils perpetrated by other Africans in Africa?



Evil is evil.

“but it was a universal human institution found in every culture on every continent until white Englishman decided to bring a halt to it.”

If white Englishmen were so morally superior, why did they engage in slavery in the first place? And what made them stop? Was it American northerners in particular?

“1 here were about 2,000 non-white British citizens in 1939, the vast majority in or around London. Most were wholly or part Chinese or Indian in origin.”


Source? Not sure why cited this statistic. You need to address my points, which were based on your statements about the British Empire, specifically the 13 colonies, NOT London.

2 In 1776 English constituted 70% of the white population of the 13 colonies. Another 20% were Scots, Welsh or Irish. 10% were other – nearly all French, German or Dutch. So from the start Irish and German settlers were part of the mix. The views of native Americans in the 1840s and 1850s towards renewed immigration is irrelevant – they weren’t British subjects.


Nativists, as in those who had originally settled in the States, NOT Native Americans. The views of nativists are absolutely relevant because they decidedly opposed additional whites from entering the country.

3 Slavery was not permitted in Britain. The Mansfield case of 1774 finally refuted that. The British were the first colonial power to abolish slavery in its colonies ( St Helena 1790s ).

Ok, and how is this germane to the point that black slaves were found in the British Empire, specifically the 13 colonies?

Well, everybody missed it. Where did this happen? In the Nyunzu region. Did you notice that? The NyUNZu region. This is a subtle hint by the NYT how uncontrolled media can cause chaos in the world. Just the word unz within the region’s name causes some to accidently stumble across this web site, which has resulted in a destablizing effect in the region.

Seems to me the best thing that ever happened to them was when other black Africans captured and enslaved their forebears and sold them to Western slaver traders which got them out of the hellhole of Africa.

There is no question the descendants of American slaves are better off than their cousins who never left Africa. But also never (ever!) mentioned is the question of whether the slaves themselves were better off. We are given only the Narrative that slavery was universally brutal and the greatest evil (except the Holocaust) in history. But is that true or was the reality much more nuanced? We know that life for the African in Africa was short and brutal while for the slaves it was very much a mixed bag particularly in America. Given the economic value of slaves, we can be certain they were better fed, clothed, educated, and housed than they were back in Africa. And there are contemporary anecdotes about African slaves having it better than poor Southern whites. Surely there were some thoroughly evil slave owners who committed unspeakable atrocities, but was that as common as the evils perpetrated by other Africans in Africa? And of course the very idea of slavery, of owning humans, is fundamentally evil – but it was a universal human institution found in every culture on every continent until white Englishman decided to bring a halt to it. But again, just as we cannot think honestly about HBD, we mustn’t ever think honestly about Africans in America.

1 here were about 2,000 non-white British citizens in 1939, the vast majority in or around London. Most were wholly or part Chinese or Indian in origin.
2 In 1776 English constituted 70% of the white population of the 13 colonies. Another 20% were Scots, Welsh or Irish. 10% were other – nearly all French, German or Dutch. So from the start Irish and German settlers were part of the mix. The views of native Americans in the 1840s and 1850s towards renewed immigration is irrelevant – they weren’t British subjects.
3 Slavery was not permitted in Britain. The Mansfield case of 1774 finally refuted that. The British were the first colonial power to abolish slavery in its colonies ( St Helena 1790s )

” Reporters were weirdly leery of mentioning that the Dinkas and Nuers are really tall.”

They’re not?

I think you’re holding on too much to some myth that they’re up to 7 feet tall or whatever.

The ISIS beheading videos, starring the likes of Jihadi John and Jihadi Joseph, are all fake.

Is that also mandated by the Koran?

If I may…

Actually it a Koranic requirement that the would be jihadi ask permission of his parents especially if they depend on him in some way.

With all due respect, hadith actually, please check your sources. The rights of the parents are paramount (emphasized again and again, right after ‘Worship God’) – something forgotten in this day and age.

Many seemingly odd behaviors of the jihadis are explained by their strict adherence to the Quran.

While I can’t stand the Daesh takfiris and their ilk and I do agree they are very literalist in their interpretations of source texts…lopping off heads is not their exclusive monopoly. Chopping off heads and placing them on pikes (or otherwise displaying them) was pretty much universally practiced by everyone in pre-modern times (Saxons, Normans, Mayans, Chinese, etc.) – even post Revolution France. Has much more to do with the sheer shock (and deterrence) effect of it than anything else.

Best to you and yours and your parents.

the obscure little wars that this country seems to have a talent for producing.

So, if Grey Lady-ians are talking about the Congo, a “country” is metonymy for a genetically common people, and that’s OK.

And it can be suggested that the “country,” i.e., the people, “have a talent” (odd but telling way to pearl-finger the population genetics) for “producing” “little” “wars.”

Damn, gotta fire up my Derridean Quotemark Factory for another run of air-hooks to sustain all this increasingly sinking PC balloonery.

The fabric of denial trends threadbare indeed.

Speaking of fiber, Cynic notes, above:

That cotton factory must have been left over from the Belgian era. Now they’re back to killing and eating each other.

The ruins of that factory are obviously emitting toxic clouds and waves of White Privilege that are polluting the locals by co-opting their previously highly evolved indigenous use of Malvaceae cellulose fibers.

This leads to the Terrible Legacy of Slavery being evoked, and something something something black lives matter microaggression disparate impact something something.

Ergo they have no choice but to kill and eat each other, and after all, isn’t that EXACTLY THE SAME as Christianity, which worships a zombie cannibal something something and is all White Privileged CisNormative Imperialist something something?

But now we must look to the future!

To hell with cotton factories! We must build Nigeria a space program! So the amazing STEM cargo cult can arise and flow like an Ebola pandemic, astonishing the world with its indigenous African magnificence!

When the Bambote elders confronted the Luba adulterer, he did not apologize. Instead, the elders said, he killed the woman’s husband, setting off a wave of killings between the two communities.

More proof that black violence is genetic. Another interesting question is why blacks like to be called “African-american”? What is it about Africa that they find appealing? Poverty? Slavery? Famine? Endless war and violence? Tribalism? Aids? Seems to me the best thing that ever happened to them was when other black Africans captured and enslaved their forebears and sold them to Western slaver traders which got them out of the hellhole of Africa.

Notice how all of this is happening in the ruins of civilization. That cotton factory must have been left over from the Belgian era. Now they’re back to killing and eating each other. The real story is that this sort of nonsense is being imported to the previously civilized world.

These warriors of freedom and democracy sound like wonderful moderates. I’m surprised the US has yet to air drop them some TOW missiles and launchers (in the name of freedom, of course).

“The British Empire did not have an “invade the world, invite the world” attitude to its colonies.”

Immigration does not have to be “non-white” to “invite the world”. The British controlled Thirteen Colonies consisted of the Scotch-Irish, the Irish, the Dutch, the Swedish, and Germans. These groups were still considered “foreigners” by the English due to group differences based on language, religion, and geography. Because of European interactions with Native Americans and Africans in the 1500 and 1600’s, Europeans began to merge their distinct ethnic populations into a single “race” to distinguish themselves from other “races”.

Remember, the Irish (and Germans), despite their “invitation” to America by the British, were deemed “undesirable” by nativists in the 1840’s and 1850’s, as evident by physical depictions of the Irish as being other than white or “less than” white.

https://books.google.com/books?id=6tw1ZwOnLj0C&pg=PA146&lpg=PA146&dq=Harper%27s+Weekly+irish+negro&source=bl&ots=h9F7-ohUIa&sig=CgXJWq_8fDeuUe5uRnYc4LaG8hM&hl=en&ei=W6q_SYCkDsavtwfvqORc&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result#v=onepage&q=Harper’s%20Weekly%20irish%20negro&f=false

Of course, black slaves were “invited” to become part of the British Empire. Perhaps that was an unwise decision on those leaders.

“The protection of hunter gatherers like Bushmen and the like had no importance for the flow of natural resources to European nations.”

These groups represented a direct threat to European colonists in securing natural resources. Controlling them meant easier access to those raw materials. As Europeans secured their borders in Africa, there was a vital interest to “protect” such groups from outside influences who would encourage these “uncivilized” people to rebel.

“By the 20th Century , if not earlier, the colonial authorities felt a duty of trust to these peoples.”

Indeed, trust these peoples to not get in the way of European commerce there, trust these peoples to learn how to live “properly”, trust these peoples to fight for European interests when needed.

The British Empire did not have an “invade the world, invite the world” attitude to its colonies. Non-white immigration into Britain only occurred from the 1950’s onwards, after most of the important colonies had left and the rest of the empire was being dissolved.
The protection of hunter gatherers like Bushmen and the like had no importance for the flow of natural resources to European nations. By the 20th Century , if not earlier, the colonial authorities felt a duty of trust to these peoples.
Please stick to the facts. Your arguments have no grounding in historical reality.

These “people” matter? How? Why? They don’t. There is little reason why.

…but Travelogues to remote and exotic places, often featuring the very people that you speak of, were a staple of my youth.

Circa 1960, my dad bought a seven volume encyclopedia titled “Lands and Peoples” published by Grolier. I still have the volumes, and it is a view of a world long vanished, and a worldview equally long gone. You can find them on Amazon and eBay at a modest price, and are worth it.

My dad was a geography enthusiast of an old type and kept his 1920s high school geography textbooks on his bedside bookshelf. His worldview of people and societies was formed by those books and caused him to seek a career that let him work in all continents of the world. He made friends in all varieties of cultures – he found little need to recalibrate that pre-pc, pre-SJW view in order to get along famously. I daresay that his counterparts were equally pragmatic in their views, looking outward from their cultures, and bore no grudge nor grievance.

He would have been appalled by what he would have considered to be the lack of honesty in today’s Western view of cultures and peoples. HBD was a simple fact for those of his time—plain as the nose on your face.

Yep. The French are not squeamish after they have decided what to do.

Maybe Mobutu having the help of French troops by that time might’ve terrified, or at least, deterred the rebels even more.

Stan, I have to totally agree with your comment. I don’t know how old you are but Travelogues to remote and exotic places, often featuring the very people that you speak of, were a staple of my youth. They are now never shown on TV or at the movies.

Violence in Katanga has been going on since its brief secession in 1960. It broke away from the rest of the newly independent Congo after that state got swamped by rape and army mutiny but only lasted 3 years before the United Nations reintegrated it by violence. There’s a book about it: Katanga 1960-63: Mercenaries, Spies, and the African Nation that Waged War on the World by Christopher Othen. A lot of the problem was ethnic (ie. tribal) violence.

How do adult pygmies size up to bantu children of the same height Or from bantu adults living in the same environment? Surely there’s a table in some old physical anthropology book. How do they compare allometrically? While it hasn’t always worked out well in the long run, how about better-arming the pygmies? Most guns are designed for Westerners of particular heights, limb lengths, hand size, and shape etc. Just scaling guns up and down maybe wouldn’t work very wall. Pygmies might do a lot better with guns designed just for them and for their jungle homelands. As a first guess, barrel lengths and stocks probably need to be altered, calibers, bullet length, powder charge amounts.

They use bows, so they’re familiar with aiming individual shots for arrow speeds, and not familiar with recoil (so one would guess). One would guess that the Bantus they’re fighting don’t have much in the way of body armor. The pygmies live in the jungle with (one would guess) rather short lines of sight- light, small bullets with small charges would be preferable to the big, heavy bullets, and high recoil AK-47s and their notoriously poor aim.

One hopes the US will step in somehow to prevent what might otherwise be a genocide of a rare and irreplaceable people.

In media terms yeah but one of the kids I played with from school, his family had a load of bronze statues from West Africa of African knights we used to play war with – not copies of European ones but with their own local armor, weapons etc. You’d think they’d be into that.

I was wondering that.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC and formerly Zaire) and Congo (Republic of the Congo) are two separate countries and have been since independence in 1960. It is distressing that the New York Times is using both countries’ names interchangeably.

I hate the way journalists have forgotten about the inverted pyramid! Now we have to wade through garbage that sets the scene or describes characters and whatever daily tasks they are doing — before we get to the subject of the story!

Half the time I skip straight to the conclusion to see if the author had something interesting to say before deciding whether to read the article for his arguments or not.

I hate the way journalists have forgotten about the inverted pyramid! Now we have to wade through garbage that sets the scene or describes characters and whatever daily tasks they are doing — before we get to the subject of the story!

We used to be able to get the facts first and determine if we even needed to read further. That was the design of journalistic writing.

Years ago I read an interview with Walter Cronkite in which he lamented the same thing.

It’s weird the afro-centrists are so focused on Egypt and ignore the civs that developed around the gold mines in west africa.

They’re just not glamorous enough.

It must be the Flynn Effect that’s finally hit them.

New York’s and Philadelphia’s black population growth rates are low but positive, in line with slow overall regional growth.

The New York Times has done articles on the decrease of the black population in the city. Many black New Yorkers are moving to the South. Harlem is no longer majority black. In the last ten years there has been a decrease in the percentage of black children in the public schools. Also, New York has a large immigrant population.

The New York Post reported that black women in NY have the lowest birthrate and have abortions at a rate of 55 percent. Half of the newborns had a foreign born mother.

http://nypost.com/2015/04/27/city-birth-rates-havent-been-this-low-since-great-depression/

Over four years ago the Seattle Times reported that English-speaking blacks tested worst than Somali and Ethiopian children, so obviously there is a significant black immigrant community.
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/alarming-new-test-score-gap-discovered-in-seattle-schools/

Miami, with its powerful Latino presence that includes Afro-Latinos, also added about 100,000 blacks (8.3%).

I guess this guy never heard of Haitians. Very few Afro-Latinos identify as black.

Nationwide black women have nearly the same fertility rate as white women. But while the white percentage of the population is decreasing, the black percentage has remained steady at 13 percent through immigration.

Just another depressing conflict brought about by European colonialism and exploitation. What we did can never be undone but we can help these people by allowing for free movement and opportunity.

The infection runs deep in you doesn’t it? Like “The Force” it is. White Guilt is the underlying firmament of reality. Where most whites would stop with a condemnation of King Leopold, for you it is all “European colonialism” and “we” remain responsible for tribal and racial conflicts in the most primitive and savage corner of the planet.

Do you imagine that before Stanley the various Bantu, Pygmy, and other populations just lived in blissful harmony with nature? Did the missionaries introduce cannibalism to the Congo? Was Stanley secretly down there on a mission to steal the Congolese’ vast store of scientific and literary achievement while infecting the natives with previously unknown conflicts over females and resources?

Some of this is undoubtedly the result of disingenuous language used by the NYT and others. They use words normally referencing aspects of western civilization to describe the Pygmy vs Bantu conflict with the intent no doubt being conflation of the Stone Age culture and modern western culture. Things like this:

Analysts point to long-simmering conflicts between the Bambote and the Luba over issues like land rights and labor practices.

“Analysts”? Really? These people have no written language even today. “Labor practices”? Really? Kidnapping, slavery, sexual slavery, human butchery and use of body parts and organs as foodstuffs and magic potions are “labor practices”? The reality of how these populations actually live is incomprehensible to most westerners. Sugar-coating the reality with flowery description is a large part of the problem. But it’s critical to The Narrative that we never acknowledge how Europe has worked for centuries to try and bring civilization to this part of the world. We must never notice the unbelievable barbarity that still exists today and blame any reality that slips through on those evil european colonizers.

You try to convince that your blather is valid and worth listening to. It is utter garbage.

“Nonsense. Diamonds are rare. There’s no such thing as a DeBeers monopoly. They control approximately 20% of world supply in three southern African countries. At best they are able to raise prices but not astronomically.”

No, your claim is nonsense. Diamonds are not rare. Are they rarer than rocks? Sure. Are they as rare and precious and jewelers claim? No. Here’s a hint – try to sell a diamond back to the jeweler. See how much you get for it. What would be the market for diamonds if not for the aggressive marketing of DeBeers and retail jewelers?

DeBeers controls about 35% of the rough diamond market, and presumably a substantially larger fraction of the gem diamond market. They have colluded with other diamond producers (including, at least in the past, the Soviet Union) to fix prices – i.e. to engage in monopolistic practices. That is why they have paid numerous court settlements finding against them for price fixing. Because they engage in price fixing.

Why are you so invested in this issue anyway? Is your livelihood somehow tied up in propping up the decietful position of DeBeers?

The uncontacted type savage tribes seem to me the most difficult thing for the SJW types to even admit exist. Whether the South American Indians in the Amazon basin, the deep forest Congo pygmies, the Andamanese, or the New Guinea aborigines, these people are clearly on the extreme ends of the human family tree and any claim that “race is just a social construct” is obviously absurd nonsense. The fact that these people are still Stone Age hunter-gatherers without written language or any technology (some do have bow/arrow but it’s not clear if it was independently developed or introduced by another culture) while Western Europeans are playing with super conducting super colliders, making sense of quantum physics and gravitational waves, and planning colonies on Mars, this all makes the SJW head explode. And so what is to me the most extreme example of HBD and has potential to teach us fascinating things about human evolution and speciation is instead as ignored as anything in science can possibly be. Mainstream science appears to wish these already obscure people would simply and very quietly just go extinct like so many others have before them. What is the modern world to do really with 4′ tall adults who have an average IQ of perhaps 60? To really study them is to admit HBD exists and perhaps teach us where the demarcation lies between race, sub-species, and species. In other words, it would simply explode a century worth of egalitarian propaganda. So the only surprise in this NYT article is that it was published at all.

Is it possible pygmies have, rather suddenly, become smarter or more aware?

Nonsense. Diamonds are rare. There’s no such thing as a DeBeers monopoly. They control approximately 20% of world supply in three southern African countries. At best they are able to raise prices but not astronomically.

The Unz Review isn’t on my saved pages . I used to just go to Yahoo or Google to search it and all I had to d was hit “T’ and it would pop up . Now I have to type the whole name in . Wass” up with that ? ???

It’s weird the afro-centrists are so focused on Egypt and ignore the civs that developed around the gold mines in west africa.

Luckily Broadway gets right to the point; no beating around the bush for them, unlike those sissies at the NYT. From the song “Small Talk” (heh) in The Pajama Game:

Read in a book the other day that halibut spawn in early May
and horses whinney and donkeys bray
and furthermore
the pigmy tribes in Africa may have a war.

Here’s Doris Day and John Raitt in the movie version. Watch it quick before it gets taken down for gratuitous use of the “p” word. (Comes in around 1:50.)

Opportunity and free movement? Oh that’s funny

I doubt they had a bronze age in the Congo.

Best part of the article is where the Tolkien Estate forbade a scientist from using the word “hobbit” when promoting a lecture on this species. Intellectual property, and all that.

Shades of the Indonesian Hobbits whose remains were discovered a decade ago.

They were only just over three foot high – so I have a sneaking suspicion how they became extinct.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_floresiensis

Steve can you have an open thread for Jewish genealogy so all the people obsessed with this shit can have somewhere to sperg out about it??

“Everybody is supposed to go around talking about how sub-Saharan Africans have the most genetic diversity on earth…”

And yet whites are far more diverse in ways that really matter. Blacks are more physically diverse?

This brings to mind what I’ve read before about hunter-gatherers (eg pygmies) being more peaceful than pastoralists or herders (eg Bantus)

I noted that the trade in so-called “blood diamonds” or “conflict diamonds” popped up as a recurring meme in the last decade. It even featured as a plot device in an episode of “Law and Order” – a predictable barometer of respectable liberal opinion. Of course, stamping out the “illegal trade” in diamonds is very much in the interest of the DeBeers diamond cartel (which is perfectly legal and normal in case anyone doubted it), which goes to great lengths to maintain its’ monopoly and to make people believe that the product they sell is actually rare and precious, when it is in fact rather common and cheap.

Is a Pygmy woman’s pelvis even capable of birthing the product of a Bantu/Pygmy mix?

“Why didn’t Gettleman tell us upfront that this article is about pygmies?”
“Poor Gettleman goes all the way to the Katanga province of the Congo to get this great story about a pygmy rebellion…”



Actually, the article is about a nation torn by war by factionalized groups who continue to embrace their cultural traditions.

“Pygmies hunt the tiny dik-dik antelope with nets.”



Primitive in regards to “western” technology? Yes. But in the end, how does it matter to anyone personally if they hunt with nets or if we buy food at a store? More Coalition of the Right nonsense.

“Everybody is supposed to go around talking about how sub-Saharan Africans have the most genetic diversity on earth, but nobody is sure if it’s respectable to talk about physical diversity among Africans.”



Anthropologists talk about the physical diversity among Africans. It’s just that when those characteristics are used by race baiters, left and right, to pursue their agenda, then it becomes unrespectable.


“Isn’t it obviously self-defeating to downplay the main thing about this story that would elicit attention and sympathy to the plight of the Mbuti — that they are pygmies?”

No, Steve, YOU are making the case that the main thing about the story is the fact that they are pygmies.

“Chosen brides” might not be the frankest term.”


How is their cultural practice any different than those who advocate Christian patriarchy? Why should not American fathers even today find an upstanding young man for their daughters, since we all know that women in general lack the capacity to decide for themselves a suitable suitor?


http://www.butterfliesandwheels.org/2011/my-life-as-a-daughter-of-christian-patriarchy/

“By the first half of the 20th Century, these peoples were being reasonably well protected by the white authorities.”

Yes, we know, the “Invade The World, Invite The World” philosophy embraced by European colonizers, for God, glory, and gold, has worked out so well for whites today. All for progress.

White authorities “reasonably well protected” their black and brown underlings primarily to maintain the flow of natural resources to European nations.

Hate is love. War is peace. Atrocity is justice. Aliens are family.

They often are but writing about pygmies may also be a precursor to the Out of Africa theory getting blown up.

A brave and compassionate American has devoted his life to helping a small tribe of Pygmies secure their land (which Bantu steal) and dig water wells, and bring attention to their plight.

You know, a neocolonial, culture appropriating Cis.

http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/justin-wren-big-pygmy-mma/

indeed, quote:

It is much wiser and more moral to politically destroy the enemies of liberalism, especially those who are hell-bent on preaching dislike of people they don’t know, and obstructing the progression of America into a more peaceful, just, and – yes – loving society.

Hollywood doesn’t have any problem with honoring that subject matter so long as they can blame one of their usual suspects, like the international black market diamond trade in Blood Diamond.

Am I the only person that thought of ABC’s Poison Arrow when they read this? Yes, I’m shallow. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poison_Arrow

In keeping with the Sailer’s tradition of liberal use of video in the comments section, as well as his oft demonstrated knowledge of ’80s new wave, the below is my humble addendum to your very pertinent post.

What’s in a name?

Any political system in the Congo is going to be fraught with the usual; I doubt they will be going all Scandinavian on each other if we just jigger the politics some certain way.

“By 1968 it was still too dangerous to film on location so the movie has to be made in Haiti. ”

ROFL, I think…

Haiti may not have worked for Haitians under Papa Doc, but it seemed to work for foreign film crews.

What is the Creole for “the smack of firm government”?

The pygmy goes “it’s our first war”. How does he know? They don’t write history. I bet they’re in wars all the time.

In a language that reportedly has words for only one, two or three, they must restart the count after every third war.

Please, please Svigor! Recognize the difference between trolling and sarcasm … between hopeless ignorance and biting humor … between the thesis and the antithesis. Really, at the end of the day, enjoy the joke! We are privileged to have this level of sagacious dialogue in the Unz Review. I have found it nowhere else.

Not sure where its author, Emmett Rensin, is coming from…

With that name, it sounds like he’s coming from the cooler in the cheese factory.

Is there a cheese peppered with ants?

When a powerful liberal white democrat loses to an illiberal but left wing politician who looks like Manuel Noriega, and when a wealth tax is passed – (The Ernesto Che Guevara Memorial Funding Act) – then they will lose their smugness.

Where are the anti-Apartheid crowd when you need them? They neglected the brutal minority rule of Hutus by Tutsis, which was contemporaneous with Apartheid, and was enforced by massacres. They show equal indifference to the enslavement of Pygmies by Bantu.

“One article about NIST’s explanation (impact, fire, and heat) for the WTC towers’ collapse ended with a line that no similar structure had ever collapsed due to airplane impact, fire, or heat. The reporter knew the NIST report was bunk. But he also knew that the editor would never allow that in the article. So the reporter buried the most important part of the article at the end, hoping that the editor wouldn’t read that far. And he was right.”

No the reporter in that case was not trying to contradict the rest of the article or sneaking in something contrary to dogma, slipping it past the editor. It is a simple background fact. You seem to imply that the buildings collapsed because explosives were planted inside…so you are crazy. You read articles like a crazy person and come up with crazy analysis.

Hello Mr. Sailer :

Slightly off topic but this is somewhat interesting :

The author of the article you link to about nets used to hunt antelope, has the same name of the New Zealand helicopter pilot who died along with six Italian tourists over the Hudson in August 2009. I know because the pilot Jeremy Clark flew me and a French tv crew over the Statue of Liberty in February 2009.

…/…

In other news : for you and your readers : if you have been looking at the protests going on in the streets of Paris today Sunday May 1st, you will have seen that the “youth” there are getting a lot more violent in their confrontations with police.

One French cop is between life and death right now, having been struck with a pavé.

Here is my solution for how France must in future deal with increasingly violent protesters, as told to MG at the wonderful those who can see :

…/…

Hello MG:

I am sick to my stomach after watching a few hours of video taken today in Paris at some of the anti-Labor reform law demonstrations.

This stuff is definitely getting a lot lot more violent and serious.

The “casseurs” that smash Store windows for no reason, and throw dangerously large clumps of asphalt at the cops, makes my head absolutely spin.

Just the idea of these assholes tearing up beautiful cobblestone streets and causing disgusting toxic smoke by burning garbage bins, really pisses me off.

…/…

One thing you will always always see when these protests turn violent, is the “racaille” throwing tear gas canisters back at the cops.

Therefore: I have a very serious idea for an effective police counter-measure to deal with France’s increasingly volatile CPF :

ANTI-RACAILLE PROPOSITION NUMBER ONE :
Develop then Introduce a tear gas canister that contains a timer, a motion detector, and an explosive like the ones used to inflate airbags.

Here is how it would work:

After being conventionally fired into a crowd of rampaging CPFs, once inert it would arm itself and become volatile for a two minute period. So that when Abdul or Ali or Mohammed tries to kick it back into the police lines, it would explode.

I think this is a patentable concept, I am serious.

Do you happen to know any people in high places in France to whom the concept could be pitched? (I for one have a reasonably open communications line with Bernard Debré.)

ANTI-RACAILLE PROPOSITION NUMBER TWO :
Since it is abundantly obvious that these protesters are becoming a LOT more brazen and violent – a result no doubt of supine French police engagement policies – I believe that a radical change in strategy is required.

My idea would be to use crisis actors in this policy change.

Here’s how it would work:

The day before any large planned demonstration, the police would announce that the use of live ammo would be authorized if the police were to again come under attack with any kind of deadly weapon (and yes, a Parisian street pavé is most definitely a deadly weapon).

Here’s the genius part behind this idea: during the actual demonstration, the authorities would have several plainclothes infiltrators in the crowd. When the police begin to fire what the crowd thinks is live ammo (they would in fact be using special high-decibel blanks) a couple of strategically-placed police crisis actors would fall to the ground pretending to be struck, maybe even using some Hollywood-style fake blood in a balloon.

This would immediately cause the violent protesters to drop their cobblestones and flee, scurrying back to their government-paid housing in the banlieues that they have turned into no-go zones. (Wouldn’t it be great if we could call them “no-come” zones instead?).

Note: implemented correctly, this policy would only have to be used once or twice, before it sank in to the economy-sized brains of France’s angry 18 to 30-year-old ghetto yoofs that whitey just ain’t putting up with this shit any more.

Please also note : this policy shift (live ammo) would work best in the aftermath of a fatality among the police. It looks like there is a CRS officer (the one with the white hair unresponsive on the pavement) who might be about to offer this very scenario (he is between life and death right now, apparently).

…/…

MG : It is clear that something has to give, and pretty soon. And you and I both know what that means : Europeans have to re-take possession of their nations and their identity.

Please let me know what you think. I am serious when I say that I think these two concepts (one-way tear gas, crisis actors amid “live” ammo) are not only doable, but necessary (especially the first one).

…/…

I belive the phrase you were looking for is “African American community”. We’re all prosperous now, and we can afford the top shelf words.

How did the NY Times avoid blaming the conflict in part on Climate Change?

“There are a lot of reasons to dislike democracy, that extraordinarily bloodthirsty goddess. What ISIS has done is child’s play compared to what’s been done worldwide in the name of democracy. So it warms my heart a little to see such a dark corner of the world as the Congo, which was called Zaire when I was young, called by everyone today the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Let THAT subconsciously color the world’s perception of democracy for a while. This could do a tiny bit of good.”

Dunno. The approx 40 million deaths that Genghis Khan racked up isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement for autocracy:

Colin McEvedy, Atlas of World Population History (1978):
China Proper: In the text, he states that the population declined by 35 million as the Mongols reduced the country to subjugation during the 13th Century. In the Chart, the population drops from 115M to 85M between 1200 and 1300 CE. (p.172)
Iran: Charted population declined from 5.0M to 3.5M
Afghanistan: from 2.50M to 1.75M
Russia-in-Europe: 7.5M to 7M

Nor, for that matter, is the reign of Shaka Zulu:

Mfecane (1818-1840), and the reign of Shaka (1816-1828) 1 500,000

Eugene Walter, Terror and Resistance (1969) cites the following, but admits it might be lower:
Henry Francis Flynn: more than 1,000,000 deaths caused by Shaka’s wars.

George Theal, History of South Africa (1915): 2,000,000

The diary of Henry Francis Fynn, 1838, p.20: “The numbers whose death he occasioned have been left to conjecture, but exceed a million.”

Major Charters, Royal Artillery, “Notices Of The Cape And Southern Africa, Since The Appointment, As Governor, Of Major-Gen. Sir Geo. Napier.” United Service Journal and Naval and Military Magazine, London: W. Clowes and Son, 1839, Part III, p.24: “Chaka may be termed the South African Attila; and it is estimated that not less than 1,000,000 human beings were destroyed by him”

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th edition, “Shaka”, v.10. p.689 (“… left 2,000,000 dead in its wake.”)

Donald R. Morris, The Washing of the Spears, p.60 (“At least a million people, and more likely two, died in a decade that virtually depopulated” the interior.)

Hanson, Carnage and Culture, p. 313: “Shaka … slaughtered 50,000 of his enemies in battle…. As many as 1 million native Africans had been killed and starved to death as a direct result of Shaka’s imperial dreams.”

And then there’s the massacre of the Dzungar (1755–1758) at the hands of the Qing dynasty: Approx 600,000 deaths

etc, etc, etc

“By 1968 it was still too dangerous to film on location so the movie has to be made in Haiti. ”

ROFL, I think…

I thought it was decent but not great. I don’t really think the subject matter was a problem. It received several NAACP nominations and awards. And Canada’s “Rebelle”, with the same subject matter, received a foreign language Oscar nomination a few years ago.

Related. Now we know that the Etruscans were our moral superiors:

Etruscan women participated in athletic events, drank wine, socialized publicly with men, and even learned the art of war. Often, they participated in athletic events naked, just the way men did at the time, riding horses and throwing spears bare-breasted. In ancient Greece, commentators called Etruscan women slutty, and considered it morally reprehensible that they were allowed to drink and talk with men other than their husbands. In Greece and Rome, women were rarely permitted to drink, nor did they eat with men.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/03/rare-example-of-lost-language-found-on-stone-hidden-2500-years-ago/

Oh wait. Maybe they used women in battle against the Romans. That wasn’t smart.

Possibly the first substantial infusion of Yanmaya and/or finno-ugric blood into the jewish gene pool.