RhythmiC

Thank you for the compliment! <3
I should probably add some caveats though, because I think I focused too heavily on specifically the Holocaust. I don't mean it wasn't as bad as it was, and it counts as the most horrible event in human history for a legitimate reason, but there were also the Japanese experiments in ww2. (And let's not forget the pleasure women, which was sexual slavery by its very definition.)
I also made a bit of a grammatical error in the first comment I wrote, where I wrote "it started with Slavic people", but I meant "the name started with Slavic people". Anyway, the social class of slaves is way older than that, for thousands of years before Christ.

There is a lot of proof that Christ did exist btw, but the three major religions disagree about what he was. Jews saw him as a fraud, while Christians saw him as the messenger of God (basically about how they see him as the son of God, meant to channel God's words to the people), and Islam viewed Christ as having had extraordinary powers but that he's not related to God and wasn't a messenger of God. Because in the Islamic faith, the role as messenger of God is in their eyes only Muhammad.

Anyway, so the abolishment of slavery as widespread as it is now, is a very new thing in world history.

What's funny is that the person kept refusing to accept other instances of slavery throughout world history as actually being as bad as it was in the US (and worse). Admittedly Caucasians have most often been enslaved by other Caucasians, but there was a case where Africans enslaved Caucasians en masse as well. Middle East did it too sometimes. Mediterranean countries also did it. So on and so forth.

But the norm for slavery throughout human history has always been due to debt and the conflicts where the winners makes the losers into slaves (the global population figures have always increased through the centuries, with massive turbulent natural disasters clumped together as an exception, so it's not like tens of millions or hundreds of millions of people were all enslaved from a single conflict or anything like that).

However, there are three distinct instances of slavery in world history that can arguably be called the worst either with the system, the treatment, or the length of it being the primary metric.
None of them was the US.

Don't misunderstand me though, the slavery in the US was extreme. There have been way more "humane" (if you can ever call slavery that) instances as well, in comparison to the US.
But it also wasn't the worst, not even close to the worst in any of those metrics, and people don't go around yelling "Damn you for enslaving my people all those centuries/millennia ago!!!" all around the world to each other, ever since everyone was enslaved at different points throughout history.

Not letting slavery become the norm again is important. But that's part of what the UN is for
(although they don't want to finish getting rid of it for political reasons, it'd anger certain very powerful nations if they were to try, including angering Europe and the Democratic Party's voters in the US because it's heavily tied to the asylum system making people take "loans" from the criminal organizations that handles the human smuggling to the first world by saying they'll pay for it when they start their new lives wherever they go, which is how they get put into debt since many can't pay upfront and the criminal organizations aren't exactly known for being nice.
So the men are forced to work for nothing and the women are used for human trafficking by the organizations in order to pay off that debt, and then in places like China where they keep everything hush-hush and the world looks the other way where they not only do ethnically targeted enslavement but also random cases of the normal debt-into-slavery cycle on an individual level),
and it'd upset certain hardcore religious countries where they do child marriages which also falls under the slavery umbrella.

There's also places like Myanmar where right now it is still prevalent, and other places too that also don't count as world powers but are left alone because of... reasons. It's just not a topic any politician wants to try to get others to take action against, and nobody would likely get any support for it even if they were to try to do so, because no country wants to take on that burden of resources like the lives of soldiers, munition stocks, logistics, so on and so forth, just for the sake of uprooting it from all corners of the world. China for example can't even be pushed into getting rid of it due to its military capability and economic ties to the world, and they pretend like it isn't a thing and heavily censor anything even hinting at it.

There's also DPRK where it's basically a nation of slavery, although they don't technically think of themselves as that. It's heavy indoctrination to the point where they genuinely believe the Kim family are deities, literally speaking. For the more skeptic ones, they're kept under control because they and their entire family and relatives are erased if anyone dares to defy the government.

Then there's Turkmenistan, which is basically worse than DPRK. It might be hard to imagine a country being worse than DPRK when it comes to that stuff, but Turkmenistan ranks at the top of the worst right now.

There are also hiring scams, which is even done at a country level in places like Saudi Arabia, where they get foreigners to travel to them for the sake of starting a job, and then they take their passports and put them in work dormitories (basically modern-day work camps), where they live practically as slaves.
Criminal organizations do this too in certain parts of the world, which the governments are either doing just enough to say they're doing something against it, or are actually completely turning a blind eye to it, in such countries where those organizations operate from. Criminal organizations use them for organized scamming online, while Saudi Arabia use them for other things.

These are not topics people like to find out about, and nobody wants to tell people about it in any sort of clear manner, so people fall under the illusion that slavery is a thing of the past with the US being the only instance of slavery that people keep being reminded of which makes some people think it was the worst example of it. The UN has even done their own reports about these things, although they like to skip out a few details here and there (*cough* China *cough*), but it's practically just for archival purposes to be used in future history books someday.

Anyway, so because they won't let that one instance of slavery in the US rest once and for all in the history books, it's still a source of friction between specifically the Caucasians and African Americans in the US, which bled out as an effect to Europe as well for some reason (US culture exports have been very influential ever since the rise of Hollywood) and part of why it's still a thing is because they keep reminding themselves of it by using the slur as colloquialism.
Which is why that comparison to the Holocaust is very fitting, since those slurs should never be used either. Not even as a weird form of self-empowerment should they ever use those slurs for themselves from the Holocaust even if it is to claim it's for self-empowerment.

And by the Jewish people not having used them in that way, those slurs have properly been put to rest in the history books and they haven't made a return in any meaningful way.
(Although some weird people still idolize the Mustache Man and that ideology for some reason, but they're such a small minority that they don't have any sway over any society. Putin and Russia are currently nearly identical to Germany in ww2 btw. The rhetoric is nearly identical, the actions taken are nearly identical, and the oppression and propaganda within is nearly identical.
Ukraine even got a unit of paramilitary which are literally followers of Mustache Man and that ideology too, which is kinda weird, but they're operating in isolation and are basically just being used for the good of the country as a whole during the conflict, since the country won't exist if they lose that war.)

Anyway, the current siege mindset refusing to accept nuances to things, even though nearly everything is a shade of nuance, is making people get hung up on basically the headlines while they ignore the articles, figuratively speaking.
The short format popularized by tiktok is also accelerating the spread of that mindset, where "too much information" is basically more than 1 paragraph, or 2 at most, no matter what it is about.

But I'm glad what I wrote didn't fall on deaf ears! I very much appreciate that, thank you!

PS:
I said I wouldn't respond to that person, but you're not that person so I don't mind replying to you! :)


I'm not politically aligned to neither the left nor the right side of the political spectrum btw. If anything, I tend to score equally as much for the left side of the political spectrum as much as for the right side, on places where they give you questions about such things. I'm a bit of an odd case, but I call bs when I see it, no matter if it's a political ideology or a politician.
And for the record, I think Trump has already doomed the world into the worst financial crash in human history, all because he wouldn't accept the plans which Pentagon and the CIA have worked on since the 80's in hypothetical scenarios and identified the Hormuz Strait as a critical point in a hypothetical conflict with Iran, and has yet to do so to this very day. Open source intelligence, such as marine trackers and UKMTO, and so on, have shown that pretty much every single statement both by Trump and the US Central Command about it all, have been bs.

The world has been running at a deficit of oil supply ever since the Hormuz Strait became what it is in the conflict, and it has been subsidized by the US Oil Reserves to keep fuel costs low globally. So keep an eye on those oil reserves. You don't need to keep an eye on the open source intelligence, but that oil reserve supply is the one absolute metric that will decide the outcome of that conflict for the world as a whole right now, in case you're curious about what I mean.

There's also the whole AI "council" where they literally donated money to get a seat for, and it's full of the people that runs the AI industry so they're basically in positions where they officially police themselves freely however they want.

It's just... it's sad to see what is happening to the world right now. Russia is also showing every indication that they'll escalate during 2027, where they go into war with NATO in order to try and make NATO give up on Ukraine. Which is very similar to what Germany and Japan did in ww2, they both tried to push themselves out of a place of desperation by escalating and scaring their opponents into giving up out of fear of even more escalation. For example, Pearl Harbor was what the Japanese did, because the US blockade on oil for the Japanese was something that would've otherwise either forced them to concede their imperialism during ww2, or to have a public uprising against the military (the emperor was effectively a figurehead at the time, the country was essentially run by the military back then), so the military decided to attack the US and hoped it would make them give up on the blockade.
Which is a situation Russia is in right now, they're facing that exact same desperation.

For the record, the only genuine threat Russia have to use against NATO, is their warheads. There are different sizes of those warheads, strategic being the big country-ending ones, while the tactical warheads are the town-ending ones.
So there's a theory that Russia will as a final act of desperation, find a pretext to use their tactical warheads on NATO and/or Ukraine, and basically play a game of chicken with NATO to see who blinks first by giving up.

Because the thing about oppressive regimes, is that they don't care about the lives of their citizens. They care about their own lives in the government. If you want an example of that already by the current Russian government, then look at their casualty figures in Ukraine (casualty includes both wounded and dead, while fatalities counts only the dead. So the Russian casualty figure is way higher than the Russian fatalities in Ukraine, although there has been a large amount of fatalities as well.)
which should tell you just how little they care for their own people.

So the Russian leadership don't really think warheads are bad because their citizens would die en masse. The leadership would do so willingly by themselves if they ever got a reason to, like for example what happened in Iran shortly before the current conflict started and what the regime did to their own people.
The Russian leadership think warheads are bad because they would lose the comfort they enjoy if they were to enter such a conflict.
The problem is that they're being pushed onto the brink where they will either have to use them as an act of desperation for the reason mentioned earlier, or they will fall at the hands of their own people whether it be a coup or a civilian uprising. The Iran precedent of a civilian uprising makes an uprising unlikely to succeed though.

Another thing is that especially in the modern day, people won't really do an uprising unless they will die either way, such as from massive food insecurity or extreme poverty. So the Russian civilians have a long way to go until they would even think of trying something.

The US knew about an attack coming soon weeks before Pearl Harbor btw. They did nothing to prepare though, which is believed by most to be because they underestimated the Japanese navy at the time.
They didn't know exactly where, they didn't know exactly when, but they knew an attack was coming soon. But yeah, nothing was done to prepare for it, which is how Pearl Harbor happened.

It's like that whole "History doesn't repeat itself, but it sure does rhyme"-saying which we're living through right now. These are historic times on the world stage, which most people are unaware just how major all of this is.
The spread of tensions globally right now is also pretty much like the edge of just before ww2 had started for real.

Ok, this is going to be my last reply to you because you've crossed a line that should never be crossed. All I will tell you is that you need to learn about world history outside of the USA. Especially about the history of slavery and racism, since you're so fixated on those particular topics which you keep implying was unique to the US about how bad it was (it wasn't unique, and it wasn't the worst case of that in world history).

Most importantly, and this is a direct failure of your personal educational background, is that you need to learn about what they did in ww2. It wasn't just weapons and gas chambers. It was a whole lot more, things that there are no words to describe just how unspeakable it was. It wasn't only things they did to ethnic groups either, it was also what they did to those showing signs of dissent.
You need to learn about all of it. In detail. And I can guarantee you that it will make you feel sick as you learn about it, as long as you're as empathetic of a person as you keep portraying yourself to be.

Good luck to you. I hope you'll seek knowledge instead of denying it, from now on.

Well, it'd be a much longer post if I'd include every instance of slavery that ever existed. But you're ignoring the argument. You do realize they didn't invent how slavery works when they brought it to USA, right? Yet you say nothing compares.

And yes, the logic is exactly the same. You can only say that it's ok for an ethnic group to use a slur that was used against them to dehumanize them during a time of mortal oppression, if it's also ok to do so by the other ethnic groups that experienced the exact same justification from during other times in history.

Also, you're not seriously claiming the history of specifically slavery in the US, was worse than the Holocaust, are you? Do you even know the details of what they did during ww2?

As explained, it has happened to everyone. Everywhere. You need to learn about world history a bit more.
As I already made clear, there have been times, not just the time with the USA, but also other times, where a specific group of people based on the color of their skin or place of origin have been targeted to turn into slaves. For example Slavs, a.k.a. Slavic people, from which the very word itself originates. Slavic people are white, didn't seem like you got that implication.
Slavs were literally turned into slaves because of their place of origin, the same way Africans have been turned into slaves throughout world history from time to time.
But originally, and times in between such cases, it has been about people being turned into slaves due to debt or as captured war prisoners and civilians of the lost villages/towns/countries.

Africans have turned other Africans into slaves as well, because as mentioned, the norm throughout world history has been due to debt or as results of conflicts. Africans have also been turned into slaves by Asian countries too, on occasion. By different empires too, and so on. A lot of slaves have existed from everywhere in the world, throughout world history.
USA is a very young country. Slavery has existed for much, much longer.

By its very definition, it's about the lowest societal class in the social hierarchy throughout mankind's history, being below all other.

Ergo, it's classism. Pure and simple. It has just been intertwined by racist motivations occasionally throughout world history, but not always. Even now, it's only due to debt in modern times. Well, debt and a certain religion.

I love how you glossed over the part about how if going by your very own logic, it should be ok for Jewish people to be the only ones using those slurs listed in the previous reply.
See what I mean by how certain words should just never be used again in any person-to-person manner anymore? You can't say the N-word is ok to use only by one ethnic group, without saying Jewish people are the only ones allowed to use those other slurs.
Just make them all not allowed to be used in any person-to-person manner, and let history bury the negativity once and for all. I'll bet you didn't know about those German slurs for Jewish people, did you? That's because they allowed them to be buried in history.

To be clear, I'm not Jewish. I'm Scandinavian and agnostic, and couldn't care less about your culture wars. But you're actively causing harm to yourself and others, by not letting yourselves normalize the dynamics between everyone. You'll always be at odds if you're always emphasizing the differences, and it will always have a negative connotation because of its etymology if you keep using that word even if you yourself feel that it empowers you.

I'm going to assume you enjoy kdramas since you're here commenting on an article about a kpop star, so maybe this will affect the way you think and make you wonder if it's ok to let the past be in the past or not:
The country with the longest systemic slavery, was Korea. So if you dislike the USA for having had it for a comparatively very short amount of time, what do you think about Korea?

Except I CAN use that as an example (what is up with your constant caps for emphasis?), because it's not about hierarchy. To a Jewish person, they feared that more than any actual African American slave ever feared the N-word. Not just the genocide and gas used on them, but also the actual human experimentation, made that the scariest phrase to them.
But fine, if you want a literal comparison, then the Holocaust Encyclopedia have a lot of examples of slurs they used to remove Jewish people of their humanity, literally the exact same description you just gave for the N-word:
Parasites
Pests / Vermin
Rats
Bacilli / Bacteria
Sub-humans
Jewish pack / rabble
Financial Jews
Alljuda (there was no translation given for this word, but I'm pretty sure it just means "All Jews" but the encyclopedia explains it was used in propaganda as a reference to a conspiracy theory)

^ All of those words were of course said in German, but the encylopedia provided the translations and explanations.

They were a bit more creative in some ways, and way more literal in other ways (I guess that's the German language in a nutshell sometimes), but you're saying it's ok for Jewish people to use all these slurs as colloquialism the exact same way you describe the N-word being used by African Americans?

As for slavery, the African Americans are not unique. Everywhere there have been slavery, of all different kinds of people in the world. If anything, slavery in itself is pure classism; not racism. It can target specific groups of people by the color of their skin, on a case-by-case basis throughout history such as the case with USA, but that's more the slavery and racism being combined for those specific cases; but slavery itself isn't equal to racism.

But like I said, the word slave is derived from the Slavic people, from back when they were slaves.

Here's a fun little fact for you: Do you know WHY it's called "slave"? It's not because people of African descent used to be some of them. It's because the word started with Slavic people in Europe. As for slavery in modern day, it's STILL a thing. It's just not in the US (although the exploitation of undocumented immigrants is close to it, except they get freedom outside of work which real slaves never get).
As for the N-word, it's because it's still used that it still causes problems to flare up. It doesn't matter who uses it. It's like saying Heil "Mustasche" is ok for Jewish people to say.

Certain things just needs to be erased. Period. And the UN needs to stop messing around as it turns a blind eye to the underworld of human smuggling, and in some parts of the world actual slavery.
UN have published reports on the ties between human smuggling and criminal organizations and that the system enables it instead of stopping it, as well as on slavery around the world.

The UN has yet to do anything about it. Because no politician wants to talk about it openly.